Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Virginia Tech Shooting Update; Survivors and Their Families Speak About Tragedy; Alberto Gonzales On Capitol Hill

Aired April 19, 2007 - 10:00   ET

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

COL. STEVEN FLAHERTY, SUPT., VIRGINIA STATE POLICE: They're the type of things that those of us in my walk of life usually have to contend with and deal with. And I just hate that a lot of folks that are not used to seeing that type of image had to see it. Not worried about anything.
LARRY HINCKER, ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY RELATIONS: Yes, sir. Back in the back.

QUESTION: You didn't attend a conference on Monday. It's been reported that you didn't attend that conference because of the bomb threat which had happened on campus. Was there any intelligence which indicated that something might be in the works here? Was there any sort of surveillance done on this particular man at any time?

CHIEF WENDELL FLINCHUM, VIRGINIA TECH POLICE: Which man are you talking about?

QUESTION: Cho.

FLINCHUM: I'm not sure I'm following your question about missing a news conference.

QUESTION: There was a scheduled conference in Tallahassee, one which you were to attend, is my understanding. "The Tallahassee Democrat" called it ironic that you weren't there. It's been reported that you weren't there because the bomb threats had been ongoing on campus and you wanted to remain here. My question is, was there any sort of intelligence about an event that may be in the planning, that violence might be coming to this campus?

FLINCHUM: I was not scheduled to attend a conference in Tallahassee. I had no plans to attend a conference in Tallahassee. There is a conference down there and I was invited to it, but I was not going.

QUESTION: Sir, a quick question about the timeline. Just one basic fact that is not clear at the moment. At what point have you been able to determine that the shooting began? When did you get a call that the shooting began at Norris Hall?

FLINCHUM: It was sometime around 9:40ish. I don't have the exact time that we received the first calls.

QUESTION: Actually the more important part of that question was, was there any intelligence with anyone in your department ever see that indicated there might be any sort of event or violence coming to this campus in advance?

FLINCHUM: No.

QUESTION: Thank you.

HINCKER: Rachel.

QUESTION: Chief, you haven't found -- have you found Cho's vehicle? And, if so, where did you find it?

FLINCHUM: I'll let Colonel Flaherty answer that.

FLAHERTY: The vehicle that you saw portrayed last night, we had known about since the first day. I'm not going to speak to where it was or what it was.

QUESTION: (INAUDIBLE)?

FLAHERTY: Not at this particular point in time.

QUESTION: Sir, we were told that he rented a vehicle -- this vehicle . . .

HINCKER: Just a minute. Over here, please. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Will you be providing a list for all of the injured students, as you have for those who were killed?

HINCKER: Can we do that? We're trying to do that. And there's something to do with the HIPAA (ph) rules that restrict what they can do.

Yes, sir. Back in the back.

QUESTION: Larry, can you clarify the post action report. Yesterday I thought we were told that the governor was asked to appoint a person to oversee it by the board of visitors. That that was the governor's only role in terms of the post action report. And this morning it sounds like you're saying that we're going to give it a review like we would anything else. To what extent is the post action report? And is that an independent assessment of the school's conduct, state police conduct by people outside of the entities directly involved in the (INAUDIBLE)?

HINCKER: Yes. And, you know, one of the problems that you all know that we have whenever we're dealing with an instance like this, and I've been involved in other kinds of crises, is that we're asked to make responses to your questions and realtime issues but they're still coming together. So I'm still trying to find that out. I know that my president asked the governor if we could have a review body of some sort. They are currently trying to structure what it is that they are going to cover, parse the reporting lines. And in the meantime, we will do the same thing internally. I don't have an exact question to how that's going to come together.

QUESTION: Larry. HINCKER: Yes, ma'am?

QUESTION: Has anyone from the college - I don't know Dr. Flynn or Mr. Spencer -- can you either clarify or ask, it seems when he was -- when Mr. Cho was released from the 24 hours retention at the hospital, he was released with an order for mandated counseling. Was the school alerted to that? Should you have been alerted? Or, by law, were you not allowed to be alerted? And if you knew that he was supposed to receive court-ordered counseling, did you track that? Did you follow up? Did you make sure he had gotten that?

DR. CHRIS FLYNN, DIRECTOR, COOK COUNSELING CENTER: I mean you're addressing an issue of what happens to clients when they're released from hospitals. I am sure every person who is released has an appointment in hand for follow-up services when they're released from any medical facility. To my knowledge, we were not individually notified. But I'm not sure I can say much more than that at this point.

Clearly the after care of patients released from psychological hospital is a dramatic issue for our country. Funding for mental health services in the United States has dropped in half over the past 25 years. We have seen every time there's a cut in public funding, the first people that are cut are mental health providers and we do our entire system a disservice by continuing to do that.

HINCKER: Yes, ma'am, right here. Go ahead.

QUESTION: (INAUDIBLE) follow-up (INAUDIBLE).

HINCKER: Go ahead, Susan.

QUESTION: Given that he had gotten to Access, and gotten to (INAUDIBLE) all of this because of the . . .

HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: All right. So we have been listening in to the latest news conference to come our way out of Blacksburg, Virginia, on the Virginia Tech situation. A frustrating one, actually, in my opinion.

Want to go straight now to Brianna Keilar, who is standing by, has been listening in to the press conference as well.

And, Brianna, I don't know about you, but it took a really long time to start getting back to questions about the events and they wanted to talk so much about this multimedia that's come out. I'm just trying to figure out how that gives us any answers as to what happened and moves us forward in the investigation in this case.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, what we did hear at this press conference, something that we've heard echoed by students and families. They've been upset that Cho had this platform. They said that it was pretty much like Cho rising from the grave in video form to really terrorize the campus again. We heard from state police Chief Steve Flaherty. He said he was upset that NBC has put these images out there in the public domain. Let's hear what he said. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COL. STEVEN FLAHERTY, SUPT., VIRGINIA STATE POLICE: Appreciate NBC's cooperation and they're cooperating with all the authorities. Though we're rather disappointed in the editorial decision to broadcast these disturbing images. The victims of the family, the entire university campus and even the international community certainly has been afflicted by these horrific events and this horrific tragedy and this intense media attention. I'm sorry that you were all exposed to these images.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Now we also heard about a special and meaningful acknowledgment for some of those -- or all of those students who died here at Virginia Tech. Let's listen to the university's provost.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK MCNAMEE, VIRGINIA TECH PROVOST: We have recommended it, and the president has approved, a decision to award all students who were killed on Monday posthumous degrees from Virginia Tech for the degree they were pursuing. The families are very happy about this. And we are actually going to award those degrees during the regular commencement exercises that the students will be participating -- would have participated in with their friends.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: So they are gone but they are certainly not forgotten. They will be awarded posthumous degrees, as we heard there.

Also, the university addressing what's going to happen now with all of the students here at Virginia Tech. Obviously they're dealing with so much, trying to overcome this situation that happened here on their campus. We understand that students are going to have different choices on how they finish the semester. This is going to include perhaps their work that they've done so far this semester being sufficient for an end grade. And even though the university is encouraging them to continue, they're giving students lots of choices, Heidi, so that they can finish up the year in the way that they choose.

COLLINS: Yes. And I know that most of them have left the campus now and a lot of them have gone home to get the comfort from their parents that they so desperately need, I'm sure. But, Brianna, I guess what I was trying to get to earlier, when we first heard the beginning of the press conference, tell me that the questioning about the events that happened on that day has not died down. It seems like every time we have an opportunity to question the leaders and the police in all of this, we should be hearing more about exactly what took place, especially between those two shootings.

KEILAR: No. And there certainly are many questions. But as they're telling us, this is an on-going investigation. A lot of the questions right now revolving around this package and the details there.

What they did tell us was that they had already had a lot of this information. As you'll recall, there was a search warrant executed on Cho's dorm room. They took out a lot of documents. And they're saying that some of the stuff they had was redundant with some of the things they got from NBC News.

Now at this point, as they're trying to determine some other things, when this package was sent, that kind of thing, they're saying some of the evidence is limited just because this package was sent out on April 16th. Obviously a very heavy tax time. And so it was a very busy post office that day.

Heidi.

COLLINS: Yes. So that was fascinating to hear, too.

Quickly, Brianna, one last question. Have you had an opportunity to find out from kids there on campus if, in fact, they are taking advantage of all of the counseling services that are available? I don't know about you, but I saw a lot of kids who were really looking like they were needing that desperately.

KEILAR: There have been a lot of counseling services. Now I was actually -- this is being provided in an area where we don't really have access to. So it's kind of difficult to tell.

COLLINS: Sure.

KEILAR: Now the first time I went in, it was just shortly after the shooting on Monday and there seemed to be a lot more counselors than there were students. But I can tell you that a lot of the students are coping by reaching out to each other. We saw yesterday that prayer service and it seems like a lot of them are really coping by coming to the memorial and just talking amongst themselves.

COLLINS: Sure. Yes. Well, that's very helpful, I'm sure, for them.

CNN's Brianna Keilar for us there on the campus of Virginia Tech.

Brianna, thank you.

KEILAR: You're welcome.

TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: The gunman mailed his chilling messages from a post office in Blacksburg. CNN's Jeanne Meserve joins us from there now with more.

And, Jeanne, what did you hear in this briefing this morning as to the conduct of the postal employees in that post office behind you with respect to this package?

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, they said that it was a very, very busy time at this post office because taxes were due. People were coming in to file their returns. There was a female clerk working here. It's a small post office. When it's busy, there are two counters open. Otherwise just one.

It was a woman who took this package. She noticed that there was an extra digit in the zip code. Took one out. It went into express mail.

But there also, it turns out, was a problem with the address. He addressed it to Rockefeller Ave rather than Rockefeller Center in New York, where NBC is located. We were told at the press conference this morning that an alert postal carrier in New York got it to the correct destination and NBC has said that an employee in their mail room recognized the return address -- that Ishmail word in the return address -- recognized it because he had been reading the local newspapers, knew it was associated with this case. And so it was secured before it was opened. And then, of course, turned over very quickly to law enforcement.

They do know it was mailed from here at 9:01. We also know that it's an easy walk from the campus from the area where's the shootings took place and where Cho lived to come over here to put it in the mail and then walk back to campus. Their belief is, from that 9:01 time, of course, that this was put in the mail in between the times of the shootings at Ambler Johnston Hall and those at Norris.

Back to you.

HARRIS: OK. CNN's Jeanne Meserve for us in Blacksburg, Virginia.

Jeanne, thank you.

Alberto Gonzales now facing tough questions on Capitol Hill. Bruce Fein was an associate deputy U.S. attorney general. He joins us from our Washington bureau.

Bruce, good to talk to you again.

BRUCE FEIN, FORMER ASSOCIATE DEPUTY U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Thank you.

HARRIS: We talked to you last hour. It's great to have you with us to help us navigate our way through the testimony this morning.

I know you've been listening a bit and there have been opening statements from the ranking member, from the chairman of the committee, as well as other members. And then Alberto Gonzales' opening statement. What have you heard so far?

FEIN: Well, I think he's clearly got an uphill battle to fight here. You had neither Democrats nor Republicans supporting his decisions to fire eight U.S. attorneys or his description of his involvement in the firings.

The second thing that seems to me is going to be his greatest problem is defending his opening statement that he would have fired them in retrospect knowing what he knows now. He will have to come forth and explain what deficient performance was at work with each of these U.S. attorneys to justify that statement. And currently, in his effort to justify firing Mr. Iglesias in New Mexico, he's stumbling and really saying it's Senator Domenici lost confidence, not myself.

And I think that's going to be his fatal error here, staking out a position that all these firings were really performance related and he will be hammered on, well, what is it that they did that was performance related that justified those decisions. He's basically saying, well, I got recommendations and that was good enough for me.

HARRIS: Well, wait a minute, let me be clear about this. So you're suggesting that the testimony so far, he is indicating that knowing what he knows now he would make the same decision?

FEIN: Exactly. And that, I think, is going to be an indefensible position when it's comes forth that these U.S. attorneys were doing their jobs, they received high, professional praise from their colleagues, as well as main Justice Department and judges who were in their districts. And you will see that the attorney general has already began to equivocate and maneuver in his answers responding to Senator Leahy's aspect about the New Mexico firing.

HARRIS: Bruce, doesn't the attorney general, at the very least, have to put forward his reasons, his justifications for firing these prosecutors? It is not enough to suggest that, you know, the senator from New Mexico didn't have faith and confidence in them anymore?

FEIN: Yes, exactly, because that doesn't wash because the decision is the attorney general's, not the senator of New Mexico. And the attorney general has basically said that he got recommendations from his subordinate and that was good enough for him. He didn't make his own, independent assessment of whether these performance-related allegations were, in fact, accurate. That he looked in the files and he meticulously examined their performance and found deficiencies.

The other thing I think the attorney general will have difficulty answering is, if there were problems, why didn't he call in these U.S. attorneys and ask them, well why are you prosecuting immigration fraud or why haven't you prosecuted voter fraud when its clear there are cases out there, rather than have this ambiscay (ph), they just suddenly get noticed, you're no longer a U.S. attorney. That's not the way in which you deal with these things.

And moreover, I think the attorney general himself has set a standard for firing these U.S. attorneys that he himself did not satisfy. He said, well, he should not be fired because although he made mistakes, now he's trying to correct them. Now, he never gave the U.S. attorneys that ability to correct mistakes. He just fired them. And he'll be asked, well why should he have a different standard than he gave to those U.S. attorneys?

HARRIS: Bruce, stand by. Let's listen to some of the testimony.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER, (R) RANKING MEMBER, JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: This record because I know you've been preparing for this hearing.

ALBERTO GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERA: I prepare for every hearing, senator.

SPECTER: You prepare for all your press conferences? Were you prepared for the press conference where you said there weren't any discussions involving you?

GONZALES: Senator, I've already said that I miss spoke. It was my mistake.

SPECTER: Were you -- I'm asking you, were you prepared? You interjected that you're always prepared. Were you prepared for that press conference?

GONZALES: Sir, I didn't say that I was always prepared, I said I prepare for every hearing.

SPECTER: Well, and I'm asking you, do you prepare for your press conferences?

GONZALES: Senator, we do take time to try to prepare for the press conference.

SPECTER: And were you prepared when you said you weren't involved in any deliberations?

GONZALES: Senator, I've already conceded that I miss spoke at that press conference. It was nothing intentional. And the truth of the matter is, senator, I . . .

SPECTER: Let's , let's, let's move on. I don't think you're going to win a debate about your preparation, frankly. So let's get, let's get, let's get to the facts. I'd like you to win this debate, Attorney General Gonzales.

GONZALES: I appreciate that.

SPECTER: I'd like you to win this debate.

GONZALES: I apologize, sir.

SPECTER: But you're going to have to win it.

This is what some of the record shows. And this is according to sworn testimony from your chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, from the acting associate attorney general, Bill Mercer, and by the executive director of the office of U.S. attorneys, Michael Battle.

You had a first conversation with Sampson in December of 2004 about replacing U.S. attorneys. Then there were intervening events, but I'll come to some of the highlights. On June 1, 2006, in an e- mail, Sampson described your statements on a plan addressing U.S. Attorney Lam's problems with the option of removing her. Certainly sounds like more than discussions, deliberations and judgments. I'm going to go on because I want to feed you -- I want to give you the whole picture here.

Then on June 4th or 5th, according to sworn testimony, Attorney Mercer discussed with you Lam's performance. Then on June 13th of 2006, Sampson, sworn testimony, said that you, "almost certainly consulted on the removal of Bud Cummings." Then in mid October, you've now identified a date of October 11th, you went to the White House to talk about your vote fraud concerns. Mr. Rove, with the president, personally.

Came back. And according to Sampson's sworn testimony, said, "look into the vote prosecution issues, including those in New Mexico." That's what Sampson says, under sworn testimony. Then on November 27th of 2006 you attended a meeting on the removal plans, attended by Sampson, Goodling, McNulty, Battle, a whole host of people.

Now, I've just given you a part of the picture as to what these three deputies of yours, high-ranking deputies, have said that you did on talking about removal, talking about replacements. Now, do you think it is a fair, honest characterization to say that you had only a, "limited involvement in the process"?

GONZALES: Sir, I don't want to quarrel with you.

SPECTER: I don't want you to either. I just want you to answer the question.

GONZALES: Sir, I guess it's -- I had knowledge that there was a process going on. I don't know all . . .

SPECTER: You didn't understand there was a process going on?

GONZALES: No, I had -- sir, I had knowledge that there was a process going on.

SPECTER: Well, were you involved in it?

GONZALES: Senator, with respect to Carol Lam, for example . . .

SPECTER: Were you involved in the process?

GONZALES: I was involved in the process, yes, sir.

SPECTER: Were you involved to a limited extent only?

GONZALES: Yes, sir.

SPECTER: How much more could you have been involved than to be concerned about the replacement of Cummings and to evaluate Lam and to be involved in Iglesias? Now, we haven't gone over the others, but is that limited, in your professional judgment?

GONZALES: Based on what I thought, that I understood was going on, yes, senator. I thought Mr. Sampson -- I directed Mr. Sampson to consult with senior officials in the department who had information about performance of United States attorneys. I believed that that was on-going and that he would bring back to me a consensus recommendation. The discussion about Ms. Lam, never in my mind, was about this review process. And I indicated so in my conversation with Pete Williams I believe on March 26th, is that we were doing this process. Of course, there were other discussions outside of the review process about the performance of the United States attorneys. I can't simply stop doing my supervisor responsibilities over United States attorneys because this review process is going.

SPECTER: Did you tell Mercer to take a look at Lam's record with a view to having her removed as a U.S. attorney?

GONZALES: Senator . . .

SPECTER: Or is he wrong?

GONZALES: I don't recall -- here's what -- senator, what I recall is, of course, I had -- we had received -- the department had received numerous complaints about Carol Lam's performance with respect to gun prosecutions and immigration prosecutions. I directed that we take a look at those numbers because I wanted to know. And I don't recall whether it was Mr. Mercer who presented me the numbers, but I recall being very concerned.

SPECTER: But you were involved in evaluating U.S. Attorney Lam's record, weren't you?

GONZALES: Senator, I did not view that. And I indicated -- this was my -- I did not view that as part of Mr. Sampson's project of trying to -- trying to analyze and understand the performance of United States attorneys for possible removal.

SPECTER: Never mind Mr. Sampson's project. Weren't you involved in the evaluation of U.S. Attorney Lam?

GONZALES: Sir, of course I was involved in trying to understand . . .

SPECTER: Weren't you involved in the decision on the removal of Arkansas U.S. Attorney Bud Cummings, as Kyle Sampson testified?

GONZALES: Sir, I have no -- I have no recollection about that, but I presume that that is true.

SPECTER: Weren't you involved in the decisions with respect to U.S. Attorney Iglesias in New Mexico, as you've already testified in response to the chairman's questions?

GONZALES: Senator, I do recall having the conversation with Mr. Rove. I now understand that there was a conversation between myself and the president. And at some point, Mr. Sampson brought me what I understood to be the consensus recommendation of the senior leadership that we ought to make a change in that district.

SPECTER: OK. Now we've got to evaluate this final statement before I yield as to whether the limited number of circumstances that I have recited -- and it's only a limited number. There are many, many more -- whether you are being candid in saying that you were involved only to a limited -- you only had a "limited involvement in the process" as to being candid and also as to having sound judgment if you consider that limited.

And as we recite these, we have to evaluate whether you are really being forthright and saying that you, "should have been more precise," when the reality is that your characterization of your participation is just total -- significantly, if not totally, various (ph) with the facts.

GONZALES: Senator, you're talking about a series of events that occurred over approximately 700 days. I probably had thousands of conversations during that time. And so putting it in context, senator, I would say that my involvement was limited. I think that is an accurate statement. It was limited involvement.

And with respect to certain communications, such as the communication with the president, such as the discussion about Carol Lam, I did not view that at the time as part of this review process. I simply considered those as doing part of my job. We'd heard complaints about the performance of Ms. Lam. I directed the department to try to ascertain whether or not those complaints were legitimate. And if not, we look at perhaps doing something about it.

SPECTER: The chairman says I can ask one more question.

You're saying it's not part of the process, you thought a part of your job, is that what you're saying? Because if you are, I don't understand it.

GONZALES: Senator, I didn't consider it as part of this project that Mr. Sampson was working on. Simply because we had this process on going by Mr. Sampson doesn't mean that I quit doing my job as attorney general and supervising the work of the United States attorneys. And that's what I attempted to do.

SPECTER: But it was intimately connected with her qualifications to stay on.

GONZALES: Senator, of course, in hindsight, I look back now that, of course, that that may have affected the recommendations made to me, yes. But, senator, when I focused on those complaints, I wasn't thinking about this process to remove U.S. attorneys. What I was focusing on a complaint that I had received about her performance. That's what I was focused on. I wasn't focused on the review process itself. I wasn't focused on whether or not her name would go on this list. I was focused on making sure she was doing her job. That's what I was focused on.

SPECTER: So that senators can focus on where they're going to be, the order on the Democratic side will be going back and forth, of course, Senators Kennedy, Kohl, Feinstein, Feingold, Schumer, Durbin, Cardin, Whitehouse and Biden.

HARRIS: All right. Fiery testimony.

COLLINS: Taking a drink of water.

HARRIS: Needs to.

COLLINS: Yikes.

HARRIS: Can I get a break? Time-out? Five minutes? A bit of a recess? The testimony, we anticipated that it would be fiery. It is turning out to be that and then some. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning. Let's bring in our observers, smart people in the room watching the testimony this morning. CNN's senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin in New York and Bruce Fein, a former associate deputy U.S. attorney in the Reagan administration.

And Jeffrey.

COLLINS: Yes, and, Jeff, boy, I mean, so far we've heard -- so, Mr. Senator, I prepare for all of my hearings and Specter says, do you prepare for all of your press conferences? This is not going to begin on a friendly manner.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wow, I mean, these senators are loaded for bear. I mean, they are really angry so far. And I'm finding this kind of painful to watch because Gonzales doesn't really seem to be engaging with the questions. He's sticking to . . .

COLLINS: Well, their minds are already made up, too, it seems, Jeff.

TOOBIN: Well, I'm not sure about that actually. I, mean, I think the minds of the Democrats are made up, but I think -- this is really a make or break moment for Gonzales with the Republicans. I mean, the Democrats are a lost cause. They want him out.

COLLINS: Well, was it surprising to you then to hear Arlen Specter's tone?

TOOBIN: Well, Arlen Specter has been, historically, at least in certain circumstances, kind of a maverick moderate Republican. And he is, obviously, very upset about these circumstances of how Attorney General Gonzales handled this U.S. attorney firings. And that's the big problem here.

I mean, Gonzales has got to hold on to the Republicans today. And he's not off to a good start with Specter because he keeps repeating these lines about, oh, I kept waiting for the consensus, I kept waiting for the consensus of my colleagues. I mean, is he the attorney general or not?

COLLINS: Yes.

TOOBIN: You know, it's not about what a bunch of underling 33- year-olds think who should be fired. You know, he's the attorney general. And the fact that he keeps sort of talking about this consensus is not the picture of a strong leader, to say the least. COLLINS: But, Jeffrey, back up for a second because it seems like there are still so many just basic, basic questions about the events that took place that we don't have answers to yet.

TOOBIN: And he's not really providing them. I mean, the basic question here is, why were these people fired? What did they do wrong? I mean, that's how it works in America. You get fired because you did something wrong.

Here, all we've heard about Iglesias is that Senator Domenici was upset about him. But Senator Domenici doesn't run the Justice Department. Alberto Gonzales runs the Justice Department. So why was he fired?

That answer, as far as I can tell, has not yet been given. And I think that's part of the frustration you saw first with Senator Leahy, then with Senator Specter.

COLLINS: Even if he doesn't say anything incriminating here today, Jeffrey, I wonder if you think -- I mean I realize it's very early on. Will he be able to maintain his position as attorney general?

TOOBIN: You know, I think the word incriminating is not really the right term here. I mean this is not about criminality. No one thinks Attorney General Gonzales committed a crime, at least as far as I'm aware.

However, you don't get to stay attorney general just because you didn't commit a crime. The issue is, is he forthright, is he candid, is he showing leadership and did he show leadership. That, I think, the jury is very much out. And I'd say, at least at this early stage in the hearing, he's not off to a promising start.

HARRIS: Well, Bruce Fein, let me bring you in here for a second. What are you hearing? What is -- let me ask it this way. What is wrong with the testimony that you're hearing?

FEIN: Well, number one, it's clearly at variance with his assertion that these were performance-related firings. When he gets concerned voice by Senator Domenici or Karl Rove or President Bush, those folks are not in a position to know, based upon the facts, whether Mr. Iglesias is pursuing voter fraud cases correctly or not. And we would have -- the attorney general should have said, well, do you really know what you're talking about? I'm the one with my supervisors who know what the facts are and I will not have my department pursue cases that can't result in guilty verdicts.

HARRIS: Yes.

FEIN: The second thing that's quite clear is that, as Jeffrey pointed out, the attorney general has basically yielded his obligation to make an independent judgment on this firings to his subordinates. He talks about a consensus but he never explains, of course, I just view it as recommendations. I then made a separate independent evaluation of the prosecutions, the facts, what were the categories of crimes that were being pursued or not pursued and then decided on that basis.

And moreover, if the attorney general had any strength, he would have called in the U.S. attorneys he had problems with and spoken to them about what his concerns were and listened to their answers, because every attorney knows facts are everything in deciding which cases to prosecute. And it may well be in Washington, D.C. that he could be mistaken as to what the cases looked like on the ground in Washington or in New Mexico.

And he didn't do any of that. So we have someone who's basically leading an aseculous (ph) Department of Justice, I do not see how he can survive this hearing.

HARRIS: Hey Jeffrey, doesn't Alberto Gonzales have to match the clarity? I mean, we understand that the bar for this testimony is high, if it's at eight feet. He has to not only clear eight feet, he almost has to clear it by two additional feet. Doesn't he have to at least match the clarity of an Arlen Specter?

TOOBIN: I think this is a heavily, heavily political process. This -- what he has to do is enough to keep the Republicans from calling for his resignation. That's his goal, I think, today. Because as long as it's only the Democrats calling for his resignation, that's just sort of the usual back and forth of partisan Washington. What he's got to do is persuade the Republicans that he deserves to still be attorney general.

And the way he does that is, I guess, to admit that he made some mistakes, but provide at least a comprehensible and reasonable explanation of why he did what he did. Certainly with Arlen Specter, I don't think he got off to a very good start but I don't think he needs to have a super human, fabulous performance today. I think he has to have enough so that the Republicans can go back to their conference and say, you know, we don't want to see any more disruption here. He made some mistakes but he can stay on his job.

HARRIS: What's the grade on what you've seen so far?

TOOBIN: I would say charitably incomplete.

HARRIS: Bruce, what's the grade on what you've seen so far?

FEIN: Well, I think it's less than C. And I think Jeffrey's right but maybe incomplete. The attorney general also has to persuade the American people because those Republican senators are every bit as much concerned about voter sentiment as Democrats. And they're not going to go out on a limb to support someone who has lost the confidence of 70 or 80 percent of the American people.

So it's not just the inside the beltway group that he's got to address here but also the larger constituency of the American people. And on that score, I think they will view many of these answers as what I style "Clintonesque" and trying to parse his involvement in the Sampson review process as opposed to his other involvement.

And I want to come back to one final point. He's been working on his statement for weeks. And he could have, if he wanted to, to have addressed each U.S. attorney and given exactly what performance- related deficiencies he's found and made an independent judgment as to why they should have been removed. And yet in his prepared statement he doesn't even spend one syllable, not one syllable explaining what was in any of these members' performance that caused him to lose confidence in that. And he had weeks to prepare this. I think that's an indication that he doesn't have any answers and he will then fall on a sword for that reason.

HARRIS: Bruce Fein, Jeffrey Toobin, gentlemen, thank you both for your time this morning.

TOOBIN: Thank you.

COLLINS: A mother looks to her son's future. Now believing he has one.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't want this to be the defining moment in my son's life. I want the defining moment to be something positive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: The last victim of the Virginia Tech shooting, in the NEWSROOM.

HARRIS: Inside the mind of a killer, a college student turned executioner. We will talk with a renowned psychiatrist straight ahead in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: Another story that we're following this morning in the CNN NEWSROOM. CNN has confirmed with the Kalamazoo County Sheriff's Office that Kalamazoo Valley Community College, that's in southwest Michigan, has closed its two campuses due to an undisclosed threat. The campus is closed both today and again Friday. We're understanding throughout the weekend as well. The college is working with law enforcement on the investigation.

And we have this statement from Michael R. Collins, the vice president of college relations for KVCC, saying that, "the campus was contacted by state law enforcement authorities and made aware of a very specific threat to our campus. As a result, we are canceling classes for today and through the weekend and are actively working with local law enforcement agencies to resolve this situation."

Again, we will keep an eye on this situation. CNN confirming with the Kalamazoo County Sheriff's Office that the two campuses there of Kalamazoo Valley Community College closed now because of an undisclosed Internet threat to the college campuses. We will keep an eye on this for you.

COLLINS: We also know that classes of course are canceled at Virginia Tech for the rest of the week. I want to talk to you a little bit more about some of the victims, though. One of the very last persons shot by the Virginia Tech gunman before he killed himself survived to tell the horrifying story.

CNN Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen joining us now from Blacksburg, Virginia with more details on this. And you know Elizabeth, the determination and this strength of these kids is just remarkable.

ELIZABETH COHEN, MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (on camera): This is really an incredible kid. He survived to tell his story of what happened in his French class Monday morning. Now, Colin Goddard was in surgery yesterday but his mother told us the horrifying details.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COHEN (voice-over): It's one of the first images America saw of the Virginia Tech tragedy. A young man and woman severely wounded, rescue workers carrying them out of Norris Hall. The man is Colin Goddard, a 21-year-old International Studies student. He told his parents he was the last person Cho Seung-Hui shot before he killed himself.

ANNE GODDARD, COLIN GODDARD'S MOTHER: One first -- one row of desks and started shooting just randomly.

COHEN: Today, Colin's mother waited anxiously for her son to come out of surgery, a rod inserted into his leg.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They still have 30 more minutes to go. Ten 'til 10, but we should -- about 10:20, he should be out of surgery. Everything's going fine.

COHEN: As she waited, Goddard described what her son said happened inside the French class. His teacher, Jocelyne Couture- Nowak, heard gunfire in the hallway and yelled for students to call 911. Colin did but within seconds Cho entered the room, spraying it with fire. He wounded Colin in the leg. Colin says Cho then left room for about three minutes and returned as Colin lay on the floor.

GODDARD: He turned his head and actually -- well, he saw the shooter's shoes came close right up to his body. The shooter was standing right next to him. He was scared to death. He was absolutely scared to death. He kept his wits about him, but he was scared to death.

COHEN: Standing next to him, Cho shot Colin two more times, in the shoulder and the buttock. And then --

GODDARD: He heard one or two shots from the front of the room and later on he learned that the shooter was dead in the front of the room.

COHEN (on camera): So he shot at your son and then the next thing he did was --

GODDARD: He killed himself.

COHEN (voice-over): The next thing Colin heard, the police.

GODDARD: Then they said shooter down, black tag. And it was a code they were giving and they black tagged a few of the other students in the room who were dead.

COHEN (on camera): Black tag means?

GODDARD: That they were dead.

COHEN (voice-over): Among the dead, Jocelyne Couture-Nowak, Colin's French teacher.

During our interview, Goddard got good news, the surgery was a success. He joined his family a few hours later.

GODDARD: I don't want this to be the defining moment in my son's life. I want the defining moment to be something positive, some great celebration of his life.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COHEN (on camera): Ironically, Colin Goddard grew up in some pretty dangerous places. Somalia, the Middle East and never had a problem. His parents are relief workers. They recently moved back to the U.S. They say they're shocked at how easy it is to purchase a gun here legally -- Heidi?

COLLINS: Yes, certainly a lot of questions about that. Tell us, though, Elizabeth, staying on the track of the patients and the other kids and faculty members who were wounded. Their conditions, the latest on that?

COHEN: Yes, there are 11 other patients besides Colin who are still in area hospitals. The bulk of them are in the hospital behind me, Montgomery Regional Hospital. They're going to have a press conference in just a few hours to update us on their conditions -- Heidi?

COLLINS: All right, we'll be looking for some good news out of that press conference, for sure. Elizabeth Cohen, thank you.

HARRIS: Still to come in the NEWSROOM this morning, inside the mind of a killer, a college student turned executioner. We will talk with a renowned psychiatrist in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: In 2005, a Virginia magistrate deemed Cho an imminent danger to himself due to mental illness. Bear in mind that was a legal finding not a medical diagnosis. So here's the question, could anything have been done to stop this disturbed young man?

For in sight, we turn to Dr. Gail Saltz, she is an associate professor of psychiatry at the New York Presbyterian Hospital. Gail, great to see you. Thanks for your time this morning.

DR. GAIL SALTZ, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF PSYCHIATRY: Good to be here.

HARRIS: What's the diagnosis? You've seen some of the, I don't know, some of the video.

SALTZ: Yes. You know --

HARRIS: What do you think?

SALTZ: You can't make a diagnosis without examining a patient. But there are a lot of red flags here. People described him as quiet and shy. I would have said, guarded is the word. You know that there were things going on in his mind that he was interpersonally inappropriate, removed, isolated, that he was stalking women, that he was suicidal, that he was paranoid.

I think that's a paramount importance because when people are paranoid they are at great risk for injuring themselves and for injuring other people because they believe they're being attacked. And this constellation of symptoms, being guarded, his facial expression, which is very flat, what we would call flat affect.

HARRIS: Flat affect.

SALTZ: A flat affect, isolated, paranoid, and, in addition, some of the later stuff is very grandiose. I would call them grandiose delusions, references to himself like he is Jesus Christ, like he is a martyr. Of course, sending these movies and these tapes, this is all something that would certainly make me wonder if he was suffering from or budding into a paranoid schizophrenic.

HARRIS: OK, so you mentioned a lot there. Let's sort of dissect that a bit. Explain to us what you mean when you describe a flat affect? What does that mean, so perhaps if we see it, we'll know it. What does that mean?

SALTZ: Well you know, it's difficult because different people show varying amounts of facial expression. But flat affect -- affect is emotional expression or emotional feeling. When it's flat, you sort of register nothing, so you know ...

HARRIS: Blankness.

SALTZ: In a lot of his tapes, I mean, he's talking about stuff -- incredibly intense stuff and even then you don't see much facial expression. But his peers at school, the teachers described him as being, you know, not possible to read, like a hole, like nothing was going on there. And so you have sort of this nothing is on my face. I am not registering anything, is really what we mean by flat affect.

And any psychotic disorder, so maybe we're not talking schizophrenia, maybe we're talking a psychotic depression, which depression when it is untreated and evolves to its worse state can become psychotic. But some sort of psychotic process, his note, his manifesto which is described as, you know, sort of difficult to comprehend and rambling, you know, when you hear pieces of it, it sounds what in technical parlance we would call thought disorder.

You know, he can't -- he's not connecting one thought to another in a sensible way, consistent with reality that makes sense to the rest of us.

HARRIS: OK, so, the students on this campus, I'm trying to put myself in their shoes and they're having to deal with him day to day, they don't have your background and training. So, what does paranoia look like, what does it sound like?

SALTZ: Yes. Well, you know, the fact that he was so isolated, for one thing. You know, wouldn't interact with other people, wouldn't answer them. You would wonder, you know, does he feel that there's something going on, that people are somehow not liking him or are against him.

And he made references to this, I mean, later on. The problem with paranoia, quite honestly, is because the person has an idea that people are out to get him, you know he keeps everything very close to the vest. He is fearful of revealing himself. And so, you know, sometimes it's very difficult.

You need a professional to basically be able to tell if a person is really paranoid unless they're saying things to other people like, well, that guy doesn't like me or that guy's out to get me or, you know, this group is persecuting me. You heard a lot of -- from him about persecution. And you know, that is a very important tell tail and dangerous sign.

HARRIS: Dr. Saltz, thank you so much for your time this morning and your insights. We appreciate it. Thank you.

SALTZ: My pleasure.

COLLINS: He took a bullet but he's alive. A Virginia Tech student describes his encounter with Cho Seung-Hui.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Evil spirit was going through that boy, that shooter. I knew it. I felt it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: A survivor speaks, coming up in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MARKET REPORT)

HARRIS: Student Garrett Evans among those recovering from wounds from the campus massacre. The Chicago native spoke with reporter Chuck Goudie. He is with CNN affiliate WLS.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GARRETT EVANS, SURVIVED CAMPUS SHOOTINGS: I mean, I saw Satan at work, and I saw God at work at the same time. I mean...

CHUCK GOUDIE, WLS REPORTER (on camera): How so?

EVANS (voice-over): Evil. Evil spirit was going through that boy, that shooter. I knew it. I felt it. God move him, move me away so that he didn't shoot me in my head or anything like that.

GOUDIE: Garrett Evans helped himself a little, too, after being wounded in the leg he says he played dead, suffering through the slaughter.

EVANS: Walked to the door real fast. Didn't say anything. All he did was bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang. Shot a girl here, shot a girl there, shot the instructor.

GOUDIE: I talked to the 30-year-old senior from Chicago's Rosalyn neighborhood as he recovers at a Virginia hospital.

EVANS: I believe those loss of lives and that carnage could have been avoided.

GOUDIE: Evans was wounded as he sat in German class, more than two hours after the initial shooting at a dormitory here at Virginia Tech. He says the police should have offered some warning.

(on camera): Why do you think you ended up spared?

EVANS: The good Lord only knows. I mean, he has a purpose for me. I guess maybe one reason is to tell you and the world what happened. I always knew how blessed I was, but now I'm blessed to a level that I thought I would never be.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Stories that we continue hear from this awful tragedy. A campus reeling from unspeakable act by one of their own. We're going to talk with the Virginia Tech student body president, coming up right here in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

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