Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs This Week
Ramos & Compean Appeal Heard Monday; GOP Debate Turns on Immigration?; Bush, Congress Joust on Iraq War Budget
Aired December 02, 2007 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LOU DOBBS, HOST: Tonight, new developments in the case of former Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean, their appeal will be heard in federal court Monday. And the illegal alien whose testimony sent them to jail, back in court. We'll tell you what's happening.
And less than five weeks before the first critical test for the presidential candidates, for the Republicans now illegal immigration is a major focus. We'll be discussing that with our distinguished panel of political analysts and strategists. All of that and much more straight ahead here tonight.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS THIS WEEK, news, debate and opinion. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
Good evening, everybody. President Bush warning Congress this week of the dire consequences of its failure to fund our military. It is one of his strongest challenges yet to the Democratic leadership in Congress. The president said Congress should approve a spending bill without any strings attached before it leaves town for the Christmas recess. Ed Henry has our report from the White House -- Ed.
ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Lou, the president this week will be on a collision course with congressional Democrats returning from their Thanksgiving break. Mr. Bush already ripping into them for dragging their feet on getting him more war funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, essentially declaring now that American lives are at risk.
The president last week making a trip to the Pentagon and saying, defense officials are trying to stop what he called another day of destruction on American soil, a terror attack.
Democrats, as you know, have been pushing a plan that would give the president another $50 billion in war funding, but it comes with a big catch. That war funding would only come if the president agreed to a provision to bring home most U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2008. That plan blocked by Senate Republicans because the president is not on board.
Mr. Bush saying at the Pentagon, it's time to get this money to U.S. troops before Christmas without any strings attached. He said that Defense Secretary Robert Gates can only move money around into different accounts for so long, that eventually the Defense Department will have to start laying off some civilian employees and freezing defense contracts.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Pentagon officials have warned Congress that the continued delay in funding our troops will soon begin to have a damaging impact on the operations of this department. The warning has been laid out for the United States Congress to hear.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HENRY: Now, House and Senate Democratic leaders fired back at the president and said that if he really wants to help out U.S. troops, he -- and he wants the money, he should sign a bill that also will start bringing them home in large numbers by the end of 2008.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid saying: "Bush Republicans have indefinitely committed our military to a civil war that has taken a tremendous toll on our troops." But that argument is going to be more and more difficult for Democrats to make, especially now that some of their own, like Congressman John Murtha of Pennsylvania, are now saying that the surge is working -- Lou.
DOBBS: The United States played host to a Middle East peace conference in Annapolis this week. The president, Israel's prime minister, Ehud Olmert, and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas agreed to work toward a peace deal by 2009. President Bush said he would personally facilitate the peace negotiations. Representatives from Arab nations, including Syria and Saudi Arabia were in attendance. Iran was not invited.
New displays of arrogance from communist China. China has recently denied U.S. military ships and aircraft access to Hong Kong. In one case, two Navy ships seeking protection from severe weather at sea were denied safe harbor. Administration officials are seeking to downplay the rising tensions with China, saying the United States wants to put the issues in the past and move on to broader issues.
Barbara Starr has our report from the Pentagon -- Barbara.
BARABA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Lou, China's refusal to allow the U.S. military access to Hong Kong is far more extensive than the Pentagon has previously acknowledged. China is now refusing to allow the frigate, the USS Reuben James to make a port visit to Hong Kong over New Year's.
And a C-17 flight that was scheduled to make a routine resupply mission to the U.S. consulate in Hong Kong, that also has been turned away by the Chinese. This now brings to nine the total number of ships China has refused to allow entry into Hong Kong, including the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Frankly, one of the great attributes of the United States Navy is our flexibility. We can go anywhere, anytime, except to Hong Kong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STARR: The Bush administration continues to say it is all very troubling, but they aren't able to say why they think the Chinese are taking these actions. No U.S. response is planned for China. At this point it's just speculation, officials say, that the Chinese may be upset about Taiwan arms sales or this all may be just a bureaucratic snafu.
Two Chinese military delegations are scheduled to visit the U.S. in the days ahead. But it remains to be seen if they show up. Perhaps most troubling to the U.S. Navy, however, was China's refusal to allow two minesweepers safe harbor in Hong Kong during a storm.
That is a rebuff to the naval tradition of allowing sailors to take refuge during an emergency. And for many in the U.S. Navy, it raises questions about whether the Chinese military can be relied upon. Nine ships later, it may be getting harder to say it's all just a bureaucratic snafu -- Lou.
DOBBS: The Bush administration this week announced what they call a breakthrough in trade relationships with communist China. The so-called deal will however do very little for American manufacturers competing against cheap Chinese products, and it does nothing to address most of the asymmetrical trade relationships with communist China.
Kitty Pilgrim has our report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The U.S. Trade Office congratulating themselves that their gentle approach to trade with China is superior to hard-line tactics.
SUSAN SCHWAB, U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE: What we have done will actually benefit U.S. manufacturers and workers. What we should avoid is needlessly hostile relationships with China which will in the long run only hurt U.S. workers and consumers.
PILGRIM: The agreement eliminated subsidies for foreign-owned factories in China, say Japanese, Korean or even U.S.-owned factories, or factories that are joint ventures between foreign companies and Chinese companies. But a closer look at the details reveals the agreement will not cut state subsidies on most Chinese-owned factories.
So most Chinese-owned factories, which are heavily subsidized by the government, are still free to turn out cheap products for the U.S. market. The U.S. Business and Industry Council, which represents small businesses, says this agreement is worthless.
ALAN TONELSON, U.S. BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY COUNCIL: This is agreement is joke. It's a joke on American domestic companies. It's a joke on their workers. And it's a joke on any member of Congress who believes that this is an adequate substitute for the much deeper changes we need in China trade policy. PILGRIM: The agreement does not address China's undervalued currency, which automatically gives Chinese manufacturers an unfair trade advantage. Senator Debbie Stabenow's office today said: "It's astonishing to me that as China continues to export unsafe, counterfeit products and manipulate their currency, this administration would point to this voluntary agreement as a victory."
Congressman Duncan Hunter's office today said: "This really doesn't do much at the end of the day and this development in no way satisfies Congressman Hunter's concerns with respect to trade with China."
Kitty Pilgrim, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Coming up next, developments in the case against former Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean. Casey Wian with their story -- Casey.
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean are finally getting their day in appellate court. While the drug smuggler who helped put them in prison may be, may be released on bail. We'll have details coming up.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Casey.
And are fake news conferences becoming a trend at the Department of Homeland Security? We'll have that story.
And Congressman Luis Gutierrez and I have never seen eye to eye on the issue of illegal immigration. Nothing has changed. But at least we have frank and full exchanges of view. Stay with us for that and a great deal more, still ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: There are new developments in the case of two former Border Patrol agents now serving lengthy prison sentences for shooting a fleeing illegal alien drug smuggler. Monday a federal judge will hear the appeal in the serious miscarriage of justice for imprisoned Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.
As Casey Wian now reports, another bond hearing is now set for the drug smuggler given immunity by the Justice Department for his testimony against the agents.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WIAN: Admitted drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete Davila will remain in an El Paso prison jumpsuit for at least another week. The illegal alien was shot by a former Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean in 2005. Davila remained free until this month thanks to an immunity deal with Texas U.S. attorney Johnny Sutton who prosecuted the agents. Prosecutors prevented jurors from hearing about two other drug loads Davila allegedly smuggled into the United States in addition to the 750 pounds of marijuana he was transporting the day he encountered the Border Patrol agents. Davila's testimony helped send Ramos and Compean to federal prison for more than a decade.
JOE LOYA, RAMOS FATHER-IN-LAW: If Johnny Sutton had arrested Mr. Davila 25 months ago as he could have and should have, we wouldn't be going through this and probably Ramos and Compean wouldn't be behind bars.
WIAN: Thursday an El Paso magistrate judge gave Davila's attorney a week to submit written arguments supporting bond for the drug smuggler. Meanwhile, the effort to free the agents continues in the New Orleans Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which this week unsealed legal filings in the case.
Attorneys for Ramos and Compean allege several mistakes, including the omission of Davila's drug smuggling history during the trail, the alleged misapplication of a law requiring a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence for using a gun during a crime and a cumulative effect of more than a dozen trial errors.
REP. TED POE (R), TEXAS: Our desire is that the court of appeals reverse the case; send it back for another trial where the jury gets to hear all of the evidence that the first jury was not entitled to hear.
WIAN: Former Texas Judge Poe and two other U.S. congressmen submitted a brief in the case concluding: "The integrity and public reputation of the judicial proceedings in the trial have been put in jeopardy and cannot be allowed to stand."
Lawmakers have also started a letter-writing campaign to new Attorney General Michael Mukasey requesting he conduct "a full- scale review to rectify this injustice."
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WIAN: The Ramos and Compean appeal will be heard Monday morning in New Orleans. Meanwhile, the drug smuggling case of Osvaldo Aldrete Davila is scheduled for December 20th and will be heard by the same judge who presided over the convictions of the Border Patrol agents -- Lou.
DOBBS: And, Casey, that same judge who permitted the sealing of that evidence and did nothing to illuminate the fact that the jury should have heard what was going on with this man. I mean, what in the world is happening here?
WIAN: Well, that is one of the strongest issues that the defense and appellate attorneys for Ramos and Compean are going to be bringing up. They think that that is a legitimate reason, that this verdict can be set aside because so much more information has come to light even within the last couple of weeks or so that this drug smuggler not only was involved in a second drug load while he was under the protection of the U.S. government, there was a third drug load where he fled from Border Patrol agents another time.
So he was a career drug smuggler. And the jury, according to the Ramos and Compean defense team, should have known that -- Lou.
DOBBS: Absolutely. Casey, thank you very much. Casey Wian, and Casey, of course, will be covering the appellate hearing for Ramos and Compean Monday.
The Department of Homeland Security is again under fire for another embarrassing news conference incident. It turns out a fake news conference by the Federal Emergency Management Agency back in October was not the first time an agency official pretended to be a questioning reporter.
Jeanne Meserve has the story on the latest FEMA fiasco.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JULIE MYERS, IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT: My first impression, this is a tremendous agency.
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At Julie Myers first ever press conference as head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in February of 2006, reporters were not the only ones asking questions. A member of the ICE public affairs staff chimed in, officials believe with this question.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Secretary Myers, can you tell us in your opinion have we put a dent into the border violence?
STEVE GEIMANN, SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS: It's not their job to ask the questions. It's not their job to pose as reporters, to pose as a journalist, to try to make it appear as if the agency is doing its job or the agency is on top of the situation. That's the job of a free and independent press.
MESERVE: Homeland Security officials say the staffer was told not to ask a question by a supervisor. She did anyway and was subsequently reprimanded though she still works for ICE. Officials say Myers called on her, thinking she was going to end the press conference, not ask a question, but Myers answered anyway.
After that phony FEMA press conference in October where staffers asked all the questions, members of Congress wanted to know had it happened before? A DHS investigation uncovered the Myers' incident.
"You are talking about two different circumstances here," says the official who conducted the probe, adding: "Neither are acceptable in any way. Both are embarrassing and regrettable."
(on camera): Official DHS policy is that no staff member should ever ask a question at a press event period. It's a policy that has been underlined repeatedly since the FEMA fiasco in hopes of preventing more red faces.
Jeanne Meserve, CNN, Washington. (END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Coming up next, Republican Candidates battle over just who is tougher at fighting illegal immigration. We'll have that special report. And illegal immigration, just one of many issues affecting our middle class. We'll be talking about those issues and others with our leading correspondents here, next. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Congressman Luis Gutierrez is a leading congressman from the state of Illinois. He is also co-author of legislation that would put millions of illegal aliens on a path to citizenship -- amnesty.
Luis Gutierrez says now is the time to push for that legislation's passage.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REP. LUIS GUTIERREZ (D), ILLINOIS: I think it's necessary that the Democratic Congress -- this Democratically-controlled Congress take up the legislation and to show the courage and to show the fortitude that it should on such a vital and important issue as comprehensive immigration reform.
I don't know. I don't know if they're going to show that kind of courage. I mean, we ran saying we would bring about comprehensive immigration reform. We are the majority. We shouldn't wait for the minority. We should act.
DOBBS: Why is it the Democratic leadership -- these Democratic presidential candidates, every one of them, pushing comprehensive immigration reform, which is amnesty, which your own Congressional Budget Office said would be a disaster? You guys continue to push for it as if the American people don't mean a damn thing to you. What happened to the idea of the majority rules in this country?
GUTIERREZ: Well, I think that if you look at poll after poll, when the American people have spoken, they believe in comprehensive immigration reform.
DOBBS: Well, you're not looking at...
(CROSSTALK)
GUTIERREZ: Well, I -- poll after poll has indicated that when you address the American people and you ask them what do you want done, they say, we want our borders secure, we want internal security and checks. And you ask them, should there be a pathway for legalization for those that are already here spending a number of years and haven't committed any other crime, pay a penalty, learn English, get to the back of the line, most of the American people say that sounds like a reasonable approach.
As a matter of fact, Lou, the enforcement measures have been so great during the last year, that this past year 270,000 people were deported from the United States. That's an increase of 120,000 people from last year. But even at that rate, Lou, it would take 40 years to deport 12 million people.
DOBBS: That really isn't an issue, and you know that. Come on.
GUTIERREZ: I think it is. I think it is.
DOBBS: Come on. Nobody is calling for deportation of 20 million illegal aliens.
GUTIERREZ: Well, then we should -- well, yes, they are calling for it. But they know...
DOBBS: Who? Name one person.
GUTIERREZ: Tancredo.
DOBBS: He's calling for the deportation...
(CROSSTALK)
GUTIERREZ: He's calling for their massive deportation. So is Bilbray and so are many others in the Congress of the United States. I didn't make that up. That's what they think should happen. The problem is they have never come forward with a plan that would actually...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: The point is that the Democrats can't see their way to saying we're going to secure the borders and ports of this country first and we're going to take control of those borders and ports so we can control immigration so that if we were to reform immigration, which we know has been a sham in every effort put forward so far, we'll reserve yours, we'll reserve yours.
Why not secure those borders and put the discussion of immigration law reform on the table and take care of the nation's business first?
GUTIERREZ: Because, Lou, you will still have 12 million people in this country. We don't know where they live, we don't know where they bank, we don't have any vital information on them. You have 12 million people walking around this country and you feel secure without knowing who they are? Without having their fingerprints? Without having...
DOBBS: Thanks to you...
GUTIERREZ: ... them (INAUDIBLE) through a process so that we can identify who they are? I think that's vitally important.
DOBBS: Give me your best shot.
GUTIERREZ: I'm going to give you my best shot. When you introduced me today, you introduced me very kindly, and I appreciate that. But it was a little incorrect in that you said, and here's Luis Gutierrez, who wants all the undocumented workers to have a pathway to citizenship. That's true.
But the first 380 pages of my legislation is about border security, internal security. As a matter of fact, when Flake and I introduced that legislation, it has more security measures than the Heath Shuler proposal currently before the Congress of the United States. We're also for security. So our difference is, how do you piece this together? Not what the pieces are.
DOBBS: And my answer, Congressman is, you're over complicating a straightforward issue. Secure our borders, secure our ports. Do so for the following reasons, because that southern border is the principal source of methamphetamines, cocaine, heroin, and marijuana into this country.
It would be a major step toward ending the war on drugs. And number two, to stop illegal immigration. Number three, we're now six years past September 11th and no one in this Congress and this administration can possibly stand before the American people and rationalize the fact that 95 percent of the cargo entering this country is not inspected, that we still have a border in which millions of people are crossing that border.
GUTIERREZ: And we have -- and the issue is that half of the undocumented workers in the United States of America did not cross that border. As a matter of fact...
DOBBS: Forty percent of them.
GUTIERREZ: Can I...
DOBBS: Forty percent.
GUTIERREZ: So but you want to focus simply on the border. So if we secured the border...
DOBBS: And I said ports.
(CROSSTALK)
GUTIERREZ: You said...
DOBBS: I said ports and borders.
(CROSSTALK)
GUTIERREZ: You said ports and borders, yet, if we did...
DOBBS: Borders.
GUTIERREZ: ... everything -- no, no, you always talk about Mexican border. You have -- never speak about the Canadian border. You haven't...
DOBBS: No ... GUTIERREZ: ... spoken about the Canadian border during this conversation.
DOBBS: I said borders.
GUTIERREZ: It's always Mexico and drugs.
DOBBS: The reason I focus on the border with Mexico is because it is the principle source of methamphetamines, heroin, cocaine, and marijuana into this country. And you find that...
(CROSSTALK)
GUTIERREZ: No, I find it...
DOBBS: I find it amazing that you could possibly ignore it. And you're almost alone amongst the open borders amnesty lobby.
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Congressman.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Time now for some of "Your Thoughts. Shane in Florida said: "What is this country coming to? Look at the presidential candidates we have to choose from. It's kind of like choosing between caster oil and prunes."
And Roy in Arkansas said: "In neither the Republican or Democratic debates has anyone been asked if he or she would keep the oath of office to preserve, protect, and defense the Constitution. I'm interested to know.
Well, we all are, in point of fact. And some of us are even interested in why others who have taken that oath haven't performed. Send us your thoughts at loudobbs.com. Each of you whose e-mail is read here will receive a copy of my new book, "Independents Day: Awakening the American Spirit."
Coming up next, why is the federal government allowing communist China to dictate U.S. policy? I'll be talking about that and more with three reporters covering the issue.
And we'll talk with an ACLU official who is leading a lawsuit aimed at stopping the federal government from enforcing U.S. immigration law.
And the illegal immigration debate turning personal on the Republican side of the presidential campaign. Stay with us. We're coming right back.
ROB MARCIANO, CNN ANCHOR: Hello. I'm Rob Marciano. Lou Dobbs returns in a moment. First, though, a check on today's headlines. Look at it coming down in Minnesota. It's lots of snow, my friends. Even for those hard-core winter veterans. This is Bloomington, but it is also deep in the Twin Cities tonight also. Police report nearly 200 weather-related traffic accidents across the state.
Reno, Nevada, the Lake Tahoe area, nothing fun about driving through these conditions. Highway patrol advising anyone on the highways to just take it slow and steady.
Nelson Mandela just one of many, many international figures leading global efforts to raise money and awareness to fight AIDS. Today is World AIDS Day, December 1st. Mandela hosted the fifth star- studded concert named after his foundation. The United Nations estimates more 33 million people in the world are infected with HIV.
That's what's happening. I'm Rob Marciano. Lou Dobbs comes right back at you.
DOBBS: A worsening mortgage crisis, illegal immigration, product safety and, oh, yes, a few folks running for the presidential nomination in their political parties. All of these issues affecting working men and women and their families. The federal government has done almost nothing to help our struggling middle class. These are just some of the issues that we cover extensively on this broadcast. Joining me now, Christine Romans, Bill Tucker, Kitty Pilgrim.
Let me turn to you first on the issue of the story on the number of those people immigrating to this country that came out this week. The very idea that suddenly somebody has discovered that immigration levels are now reaching the same peak as in 1920. What is your thought, Kitty?
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think that it is surprising that everyone is just realizing this, that this is an issue that has been seen in the local communities for a very long time and that the numbers are just starting to catch up with reality...
DOBBS: And did we mention that we've been reporting on this very phenomenon for five years on this broadcast.
PILGRIM: But that politicians are just starting to discover this as an issue is mind-boggling because Americans have been dealing with this in their communities for quite some time.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: There's also this push to put illegal and legal immigration in the same sort of category as well. And that's something that's difficult when you're covering this story because you get people saying something is bad for immigrants or something is scapegoating immigrants when you're trying to talk about illegal immigration and legal immigration, and the unintended consequences of illegal immigration, and how that affects citizens and legal immigrants.
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: But the reason that's difficult to do is because quite honestly we don't know. And we don't know because, I believe, we don't want to ask. We don't ask.
DOBBS: We don't know who is legal and who is not.
TUCKER: Correct.
DOBBS: And there are very few issues, although there are quite a few in point of fact in which we see a greater gulf between the elected officials sitting in Washington, D.C., whether they're in the House, the Senate, or the White House, and the American people, who are overwhelmingly in favor of securing borders and ports and stopping illegal immigration.
TUCKER: It is amazing. It's extremely popular. And you see that at the state level. The National Council of State Legislators this week came out and said 46 states so far this year have passed laws aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration in their communities.
So clearly with the people, this is a popular notion, and an idea that takes hold. You've got to wonder why they don't listen to that in Washington and say, here's something that...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Because they're elitist fools in the pay of corporate America and socio-ethnocentric special interest, right, Kitty?
PILGRIM: Well, I think...
(LAUGHTER)
PILGRIM: I have to agree with you.
(LAUGHTER)
DOBBS: Well, you don't have to. But the fact of the matter is, the truth will out and I know you will. The idea that this week the -- finally the Pentagon is awakening to the fact that the United States military, the United States itself has been insulted by communist China in very direct ways, denying two minesweepers in stormy seas safe harbor.
The Chinese also denying a port of call, Hong Kong, that had been on the schedule for the sailors of the USS Kitty Hawk, that carrier and its group, to go to Hong Kong. And then denying an air lift into Hong Kong -- a scheduled air lift, to supply the American consulate.
PILGRIM: It is mind-boggling that Pacific Command has been arguing for joint exercises and cooperation with the Chinese military and then gets this sudden wake-up call and the Chinese refuse them admission to their ports. It comes as a complete shock to them. And yet you can't imagine that there's been no reciprocity in this.
DOBBS: Well, here are two of the foremost experts on the China/U.S. relationship, had to say about these incidents and the mindset of this administration and the Pentagon. Gordon Chang and Rick Fisher, two of the leading geostrategists in the country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GORDON CHANG, "THE COMING COLLAPSE OF CHINA": Well, you know, the big story of this is that the Navy was just confounded. But, you know, we have this sort of assumption that, you know, if we're nice to the Chinese, they'll be nice to us. But the Chinese are ruthlessly pragmatic. And they're not impressed by gestures of friendship. They respect strength. And right now in Beijing, they don't look at us as Kitty Hawks. They look at us as "kitty doves."
RICHARD FISHER, INTERNATIONAL ASSESSMENT & STRATEGY CTR.: This administration has been trying to engage China militarily for almost two years. And it has got in very little in return. And the refusal of the Kitty Hawk and the two minesweepers was really a slap in the face.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: And what did the Bush administration do about that, Bill Tucker? Their response? The admiral's response in charge of the fleet?
TUCKER: Well, I'm not going to do an impersonation, but I just have to look at you and say nothing. They did nothing. But Gordon is right. And he strikes at the heart of something which has struck me for a long time. We think they're our friends. Nations don't have friends. Nations have allies. And they base that alliance on their -- on what is in their benefit.
DOBBS: You cannot possibly convince this bunch of neocons and faith-based geostrategists and economic true believers, true believers in free trade at any cost, and even come close to denting their intellects. These are the people who brought you, frankly, weapons of mass destruction when there were none, all sorts of rationalization for failed policies in the Middle East, failed military strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And we're supposed to -- I suppose I'm the fool to even think it would make sense in a relationship with communist China.
ROMANS: Our military leaders say that threat equals opportunity plus intent, or capability plus intent. And they know that China is rapidly getting the capability, but there isn't the intent. Well, when you look at instances like this, there is worry that there is intent.
DOBBS: I would like somebody to walk up to those admirals and just say, you know, look, if this is the strongest thing you've got to say, representing the United States Navy, just shut the hell up. And we'll find a PR spokesman somewhere in New York to speak for the United States Navy who can perhaps find more emphatic language and perhaps a stronger defense of the values and the -- of the nation. Remarkable. Christine Romans, thank you very much; Bill Tucker, Kitty Pilgrim, thank you.
Coming up next, the federal government caving in to special interests. Oh, no. Yes, it's true. Putting on hold a plan that would stop the employment of illegal aliens. We'll be talking about with an ACLU official about what they call a victory and they certainly should. And what should we call the ACLU?
New questions this week about Rudy Giuliani's use of city funds as New York mayor. Is this a personal attack, the politics of personal destruction? Is this the media being played for the chumps that we often are in these kinds of personal bouts? Three of the best political analysts join me. Stay with us, we're coming right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Special interest groups, socio-ethnocentric interest groups, led by the ACLU, for example, forcing the Bush administration to cave in on enforcement of immigration laws against illegal employers. The Department of Homeland Security suspended its efforts to enforce new rules over the prohibited employment of illegal aliens. Lucas Guttentag is the director of the ACLU immigrants' rights project.
He says they're on their way to victory on this issue.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LUCAS GUTTENTAG, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: This is an interim step. But this is a victory for American workers. That's what's important to stress here because if this rule had gone into effect, American workers and legally authorized workers would have been fired. That's what the judge found, that's the problem with this rule, and that's why it was enjoined.
And let me just explain why. What the DHS was planning to do was to use the Social Security Administration's database that has error of -- 70 percent of the errors in that are of U.S. citizen records. So if you use that record for immigration enforcement the way DHS was proposing...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: So 70 percent of the people would have been fired across the country, is that what you maintain?
GUTTENTAG: Well, they haven't been fired yet because the rule hasn't gone into effect.
DOBBS: Well, of course, not. But there was also a 90-day period in which to get everything rectified, which would've seemed to me at least had the concomitant effect of improving the database of the Social Security Administration. .
GUTTENTAG: Well, what that does is to put the burden on the American worker, to tell the American worker, you take time off from work, you go down to the Social Security office, you try to get bureaucrats to correct your records. And if you don't success, you get fired. It's a shoot first and ask questions later policy where the innocent victim is the U.S. worker.
DOBBS: Let me ask you a question.
GUTTENTAG: Sure, please.
DOBBS: Why in the world is the ACLU not filing suit against the proponents of the comprehensive immigration reform since it proposed to bring 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens into a path to citizenship and CIS is so screwed up it can't even begin to handle the legal, lawful immigrants lined up for admission to this country? It is the same screwed up mess.
GUTTENTAG: Yes, the DHS can't handle its job. That's a problem. We agree with that. And we agree -- you know, you want to protect American workers. And that is the problem with this lawsuit -- with this rule and the reason the lawsuit was filed, to protect American so they wouldn't be improperly fired. We want an immigration policy that is consistent with American values and the Constitution. This rule doesn't do that because what it does is use...
DOBBS: So you're all for border security? You're all for border security?
GUTTENTAG: Oh, sure, look...
DOBBS: Port security?
GUTTENTAG: ... the government can enforce the immigration laws. The question is, do it consistent with the Constitution, do it consistent with the rule of law. And don't punish American workers. And this rule -- because I want to focus on this rule. What this rule would have done, the reason the judge...
DOBBS: Well, let's focus -- this administration has caved in to you, the AFL-CIO, all of the folks that are advocates who are talking about being activists. I mean, it's ridiculous.
GUTTENTAG: Well, I don't know who they have caved into, but I know that this rule violates the law...
DOBBS: They caved into the AFL-CIO that doesn't know the difference between an illegal worker and a legal one. They're misrepresenting themselves to their membership and doing them a great disservice. I mean, it's ridiculous.
GUTTENTAG: Well, I think you ought to let them speak. And that's not correct and that's not accurate.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Oh, we asked them to come on and join us. And it is accurate, by the way. It is absolutely accurate.
GUTTENTAG: OK. Well, I think important thing is focus on this rule and why...
DOBBS: Well, here is what I think is important, Lucas.
GUTTENTAG: OK. Sure.
DOBBS: You tell me, give me the ACLU's position, what would permit us to determine whether an employer has unlawfully hired an illegal alien that would be enforceable, what is the best solution, let's hope that Michael Chertoff is listening to you.
GUTTENTAG: Right. Right. Well, Michael Chertoff ought to be looking at his own agency and the problems in that agency. Because the problem is there's not a proper database. And what they're trying to do with this rule is to use a database that's full of errors where 70 percent of the errors...
DOBBS: Oh no, Lucas, I understand that.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: We stipulate it here. We've watched this all unwind. We'll know more in March. But what I'm asking you, what is the ACLU's position since you're so concerned about enforcing immigration laws and stopping the illegal employment of illegal aliens, what's your recommendation, the lawful way to do it under the Constitution?
GUTTENTAG: Let me star with the first thing, which is, we could have an administration that enforces the labor laws rather than gutting them. We could have it that doesn't have one labor...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: I'm with you on that. But that's not germane to the question I asked you. I couldn't agree with more. I would love to have labor unions that represented labor instead of big business and illegal aliens. But we don't have that either.
GUTTENTAG: Well, I think we do. But I think that...
DOBBS: Well, you're wrong.
GUTTENTAG: Well, I think the critical question is...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Who was your co-plaintiff? Was it the AFL- CIO?
GUTTENTAG: Oh, absolutely, absolutely, they protect...
DOBBS: The AFL-CIO is out looking for membership among the illegal workers in this country. It is pitiful. They should be embarrassed out of their minds.
GUTTENTAG: OK, well, let's focus on the critical thing, and that is that...
DOBBS: The focus on the critical thing is the question I asked.
GUTTENTAG: Right...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: What would satisfy the ACLU constitutionally as a way to stop the illegal hiring of illegal aliens?
GUTTENTAG: Enforcement of the law in a way that's consistent with the Constitution and the requirements of the statutes as written, not rules that violate the law and that violate the Constitution and that punish innocent American workers. And there are laws that can do that that requires an accurate database. And it has to be done consistent with the American values that we share, of fairness and due process and respect for the rule of law.
All right, thank you.
DOBBS: Lucas Guttentag, we than you very much, from the ACLU in San Francisco. Thank you very much.
GUTTENTAG: Thanks for having me.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Coming up next, the battle over illegal immigration is heating up finally on the presidential campaign trail. I'll be joined by three of the best political analysts in the country for that and a great deal more. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Joining me now are not only three of the best political analysts in the nation, but some of my favorite people, beginning here in New York, New York Daily News columnist Errol Louis; Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf; in Washington, D.C., Diana West, columnist, Washington Times, Diana also the author of the book, "The Death of the Grown-up."
Good to have you with all us. Let's start with you, Hank. Republican debate, fire, brimstone. Any particular impression as to who won it?
HANK SHEINKOPF, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Fire and brimstone, I'm not sure. Mitt Romney, definitely from a wax museum. No fire there. Rudy Giuliani, the dogs are biting at his heels and they took a little bite out of it. But the guy that won and -- and John McCain, a great American patriot whose moment may finally have gone. But the guy that won that event was one Huckabee.
Why? Because he's reflective of the environment that he's operating in. What do I mean by that? He is a minister. He can talk about God and he said the most important things, that Republicans who have a real -- what's a good, libertarian streak in them want to hear, like get rid of the IRS. And after that it was a home run.
(LAUGHTER)
DOBBS: Errol, your thoughts? ERROL LOUIS, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS: I think Hank's right. I mean, Huckabee has been crowned the winner and with good reason. He's also somebody who's at the right point. You know, when you're about just over 30 days before the primary, he's where you want to be. You want to be on the upswing. You don't want to be fading, you don't want to be defending your flanks. And that's where Romney and Giuliani are these days.
DOBBS: Diana, your thoughts?
DIANA WEST, THE WASHINGTON TIMES: Well, I would say that while Huckabee has been crowned, I'm not he will prove to be the favorite, because if immigration is a big issue for Republican voters, you saw Romney and Giuliani both trying to prove which one of them was the toughest on things border security and illegal alien law enforcement. So I'm not so sure that it was quite as simple -- pans out quite that simply.
DOBBS: Well, one of the things that's very simple is to call a peace conference with the Middle East and make enormous strides as the Bush administration did this week. Are you giving high marks to the Bush administration, Condoleezza Rice, George Bush this week?
WEST: Me?
DOBBS: You bet.
WEST: No. No, no, no. I think that this was an absolute travesty. I like to think of it more in terms of the Munich Conference. The thing that really struck me was something that came out of The Jerusalem Post today which was that the American people, as represented by George Bush, actually allowed Saudi Arabia and its Arab pals to dictate that the Israelis would enter the conference through one door and the Arabs through another, which I think is basically like sanctioning Apartheid.
DOBBS: Yes, but if they're sitting down at the same table, Hank Sheinkopf, isn't that positive?
SHEINKOPF: Any discussion between the parties in the region is positive. Was anything accomplished? We don't know yet. Frankly, the people who need the most to be accomplished quickly are not necessarily George Bush, but one Ehud Olmert and one Mahmoud Abbas. And they are the guys that have the most to lose here.
LOUIS: It's worth noting, though, that this runs counter to six years of Bush administration policy. The Bush administration has not been out front in trying to solve the Israeli-Palestinian problem. And I favor the analysis that I think was given on this show that says this is Condoleezza Rice's moment to try to do something that she as a diplomat wants to see done.
DOBBS: Well, the good news is that politics as usual exist at least in some narrow way in which we saw on the day of the debate, Diana West, Rudy Giuliani suddenly being second a lot of questions about the why he was spreading his budget costs for security around as mayor. Just a coincidence that it occurred like that?
WEST: Well, probably not, I would say. But at the same time, I have to say just -- I'm glad that this sort of thing is coming out now, because I think it does kind of indicate where Rudy Giuliani's soft spots are. This kind of messy...
DOBBS: Are you suggesting women? Are you suggesting accounting? What is your suggestion, his soft spots?
WEST: Well, my suggestion is that, you know, having been mayor of New York City with all kinds of strange associations, whether it is Bernard Kerik or conducting a romantic entanglement that did lead to another marriage while mayor, these are things that don't play well in terms of a national campaign. And I think that these are things that he may or may not overcome.
SHEINKOPF: I am always happy to be more cynical than journalists.
(LAUGHTER)
SHEINKOPF: And I must tell you, as a practitioner of political craft for close to unfortunately 40 years, the facts are very simple. This was no accident. This was a political hit job and the story is lingering. And the Giuliani problem is to get rid of the story, hang a lantern on the problem, as we used to say, and move on.
If not, well, going back to Iowa for a moment, he is perfectly positioned, not much has changed here.
DOBBS: He being Giuliani?
SHEINKOPF: Oh, sure. Huckabee wins that primary or comes within a shot, Giuliani will be much stronger going into New Hampshire.
DOBBS: Errol, we're going to come back with your perspective in just one moment. You'll be able to settle the Giuliani -- the hit -- the political hit issue when we come back. We're back with more of our panel here in just a moment. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: We're back with Hank Sheinkopf, Diana West, and Errol Louis.
Errol, you have the deciding vote on the Rudy Giuliani political hit.
LOUIS: Well, I don't know if it was a hit. The reporter who broke it, Ben Smith, is a friend and colleague -- former colleague of mine. And I don't know that he'd be easily manipulated in that way. On the other hand, I think it shows an underlying weakness in the Giuliani operation.
The fact of the travel problems or the budget problems is one thing. But then the campaign's reaction to it was really kind of all over the place. And it suggests that in running for really only the second office he has ever run for, Giuliani's team may not be experienced. He has got a lot of ex-prosecutors who really only had to deal with a couple of elections back in the '90s.
This is the big leagues. And you have got to have your ducks in order. You have got to have a rapid response team. They gave a couple of different conflicting answers about what this was all about. And while most people outside of New York don't know or care what the Loft Board is or why travel security expenses might be buried in some obscure agency like that, the fact of the matter is, you've got to -- you've got to address it head-on and you've got to have one message from the very first day.
DOBBS: This story doesn't have legs, do you think, Errol?
LOUIS: No. It doesn't have legs.
DOBBS: Well, let's go to one that does have legs. And that is the continuing battle between Obama and Clinton. Who is emerging, Diana, in your judgment, on the Democratic side?
WEST: Well, the story right now is Obama. But it's also the narrative of Hillary Clinton's inevitability, I think, is over. Even if she gets the nomination, there is this notion that she was kind of sailing along, this ship of state that would just collect the nomination without any, any ripple in her seas, if you want to extend the metaphor too far.
And now that's over. And I think that that really gives an opening to her Democratic opponents and eventually her Republican opponents. I mean, just this week we're reminded of, for example, Bill Clinton now lying about his record on his support for the Iraq War. That brings all kinds of baggage back to our recollections about what it was like to have the Clintons, whether we go back to the fundraising scandals she has already had. I mean, these are the kinds of things that gather momentum.
DOBBS: Well, Hank Sheinkopf, forecast correctly some diminishment in her lead. What are your thoughts?
SHEINKOPF: Well, let me go back to something Diana just said. Those are all the things she's saying may in fact be true, but they're old saws that the Republicans and right like to say about her.
Here's the problem today. The problem today was that until that debate, I guess it was in Philadelphia, there was only one issue on both sides of the aisle. The issue was Hillary Clinton. Today the issue is, can you trust her?
Rudy Giuliani's problem is, can you trust him? Why? Immigration and not being clear on the argument. Because the same week that this occurred, 8,000 people were laid off at Chrysler.
When people see illegal driver's licenses talked about and they see people being laid off and they see candidates not taking stands on immigration, or what they see, whether they are right or wrong is not the issue. Their jobs disappearing to someone who shouldn't have them from their perspective. Rules being broken.
The people that you need to win a presidential election, whether you are a Republican or Democrat, are decent hard-working people in the Heartland whose very livelihood is now at risk because of globalization and changes in the auto industry.
You don't think that immigration makes them nuts? Of course it does. So you're going to see more wobbling, more moving around, and a lot of concern. By the way, have the poll numbers shifted dramatically? No. She got a tap. Will she get some of the numbers back? To be seen yet.
DOBBS: Errol?
LOUIS: I don't think the Hillary Clinton campaign can afford to let the story get off of what it has been all along, which has been getting the nation ready for the first woman president. That, to me, has really been kind of the drama on the Democratic side, and to a certain extent nationwide.
People are testing her. She is being tested. Is she strong enough? Is she honest enough? Is she free enough from whatever it was people didn't like abut her husband? And she has been passing test after test after test.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Well, good grief, she has got her husband in her employ.
LOUIS: Well, yes, but the question is as she -- the response is, which she always gives is, he's not running for president, I am. Judge me for myself.
DOBBS: But at the same moment says, he will be, you know, a first among a number of equals who will be in my administration, working importantly for my agenda.
LOUIS: Lou, no question, it's political. No question they're trying to have it both ways. As any politician would do and the Clintons do better than anyone else.
DOBBS: And we would expect nothing less.
LOUIS: Exactly. But to the extent that they can get it back on that track, I think she starts to recover strength. And that's what these first few primaries are going to be about.
DOBBS: Let me see if i understand correctly at this table. We're out of time. It's still Hillary Clinton to beat on the Democratic side.
SHEINKOPF: I believe that's true.
DOBBS: And its Rudy Giuliani to beat or Mitt Romney on the Republican side?
SHEINKOPF: Not clear yet.
LOUIS: Unclear.
WEST: Unclear.
DOBBS: OK. All right. Thank you very much, Diana West, Errol Louis, Hank Sheinkopf, as always.
Thank you for being with us. Please join us tomorrow. For all of us, thanks for watching. Enjoy your weekend. Good night from New York. "THIS WEEK AT WAR" begins now with Tom Foreman.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com
