Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Decision Day for Indiana and North Carolina; John McCain Trying to Grab a Piece of the Spotlight; International Police Trying to Find Accused Pedophile

Aired May 06, 2008 - 10:00   ET

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

JACKIE BANGE, WGN REPORTER: "The Department of Aviation has a very aggressive pest control program." It goes on to say, "as for the specific area you addressed, I will make sure it is inspected immediately." Inspected perhaps. Resolved? Apparently not. We visited O'Hare four times since Cynthia received her response. April 1st, April 10th, April 14th, April 22nd. Each time our undercover cameras captured these unsettling scenes of rodents. Then we visited one more time, early this morning. Nothing had changed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)

BETTY NGUYEN, CNN ANCHOR: Hope you had breakfast already. Good morning, everybody. I'm Betty Nguyen.

TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Tony Harris. Stay informed all day in the CNN NEWSROOM. Here is what's on the run-down. Decision day for Indiana and North Carolina. Live coverage of the Democratic primaries all day on CNN.

NGUYEN: John McCain trying to grab a piece of the spotlight. Live this hour. He's going to talk about the kind of judges he would put on the bench.

HARRIS: A boy sexually abused. International police want your help to find this accused pedophile today. Tuesday, May 6th. You are in the CNN NEWSROOM.

HARRIS: A live look, the stage is set. We are just waiting for John McCain, awaiting remarks from presumptive GOP presidential nominee John McCain from Winston-Salem, North Carolina at the campus of Wake Forest University talking about the kinds of judges he would appoint to the federal bench. When John McCain makes those remarks we will of course bring those to you right here in the CNN NEWSROOM.

The road to the White House. Two Democrats. The top two remaining delegate prizes, polls are now open in Indiana and North Carolina. And Hillary Clinton says today will be a game changer. CNN's crews are dotting the political landscape. Dan Lothian is in Indianapolis. Susan Candiotti is in Raleigh, North Carolina. Let's begin with Dan. Dan, good morning.

DAN LOTHIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Tony. Well, you caught me in a little slow period here. There are some folks showing up here to vote now. Two precincts right next door to each other. And officials here telling us that so far they have been open since 6:00 a.m., so in just about a four-hour period, they have already almost matched the all-time record for an entire day. So, that kind of gives you a sense of the turnout that's happening in these two precincts. We are still waiting to hear in terms of overall numbers for the state of Indiana. As voters have been coming in here, we had a chance to talk to some of them. And by far, the number one issue they are all thinking about, the economy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELIZABETH RINK, INDIANA VOTER: The war in Iraq, the economy, just the feeling that that country is not going in the direction that it should be going. So, the own us is on really the voter to kind of do his or her own homework and investigate it a little bit. And just really learn about all the candidates.

I don't feel like I settled. Until the very last minute I didn't know what I was going to do. So, I sounded disappointing and kind of upsetting but it didn't really impact my decision very much.

CHARLES COLLINS, INDIANA VOTER: The economy and the war. The economy is really tough in Indiana right now. A lot of people don't have jobs. I feel lucky to have one. But who knows how long it's going to last. I'm a Democrat but I'm disappointed that Democrats spent so much time sniping at each other. And neither one of them really came up with very concrete plans but I just don't want another four years of Republicans.

Very exciting. You know, we are a small state. Often overlooked. Flown over by everybody else. People don't think our opinions count. It is very exciting to finally have a voice. It's the first time in 40 years, not since Robert Kennedy was here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LOTHIAN: And again, what a couple of those folks were talking about there is the sense that this negative campaigning, some of the attacks, some of the controversy surrounding it, it didn't help them at all in making their decision. They were really turned off by that, Tony.

HARRIS: Dan, explain this. Answer this for me, is Indiana a state with an open primary -- maybe you can explain what that means to folks at home and with respect to -- specifically what that means for independents?

LOTHIAN: Right. And essentially, right, it is an open primary here in Indiana. That means that you don't have to be a Democrat to vote in this primary. You can be a Republican or Democrat. And you can be involved in this party. You don't have to really say, you know, what party you are part of. You can take part in this primary. And again, you know, the numbers we are seeing turning out, it shows, say officials here, and the people that we're talking to is that they're energized because they kind of feel like this is the first time their vote really is counted. Because the race really hasn't been that competitive this far along.

HARRIS: Dan Lothian for us this morning. Dan, good to see you. Thank you.

NGUYEN: All right. And another state really in play today. North Carolina a huge state in play. CNN's Susan Candiotti is at a polling place in Raleigh. And Susan, have you seen a steady flow of folks coming in?

SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN CORRESPONDENT; 3 1/2 hours. We're at an Episcopal church here. And voting here in nonstop. Obviously, this is another pivotal race for both candidates. And in this state, they are also expecting a record turnout.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CANDIOTTI (voice-over): It is their turn now and North Carolinians are relishing their chance to sound off. At the gas pump.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's crazy. They have to do something about this gas price prices. You know, I can't think of what they can do but they have to do something.

CANDIOTTI: He likes Barack Obama. But this man prefers Hillary Clinton's quick fix to lower summer gas prices.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Something should be done for the charter bus company, and the trucks.

CANDIOTTI: We found voters weighing in on all kinds of issues.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm a former school teacher. I feel that teachers are not paid what they deserve.

CANDIOTTI: In North Carolina, home to Camp Lejeune, one military wife says neither Democrat is spending enough time addressing the war.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They are not speaking of the 4,000 plus military personnel that have died nor the families back home that go through day-to-day trials and tribulations because their service member is away.

CANDIOTTI: Health care, education, the war, taxes. It all matters in North Carolina.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I would like to have more of my money to figure out what to do with my money. I may screw it up but I would like to get it a little bit on my own.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CANDIOTTI: Now CNN's latest average of all the polls here in North Carolina shows that Barack Obama has increased his lead by two percentage points back to a double-digit lead. That after Senator Hillary Clinton had been chipping away at that lead that he has had for quite some time now. So, this is expected to be a tight race. Nevertheless, Barack Obama is still expected to win it according to the latest average of polls. Back to you.

NGUYEN: And as you can see behind you, people have already started coming out to make their vote count. Thank you, Susan.

HARRIS: And now a glimpse at what voters are saying. CNN has crunched the numbers and combined several polls and averaged them out to bring you the bottom line here. Our latest CNN poll of polls shows Obama ahead of Clinton in North Carolina by ten points. Obama favored by 51 percent of likely Democratic voters. Clinton, 41 percent in Indiana. Clinton is ahead, 48 percent. Obama at 44 percent. Let's see that live look here. We are waiting here for remarks from presumptive GOP presidential nominee John McCain. When he makes those remarks from that stage there, the campus of Wake Forest University. WE will bring you his comments live, right here in the NEWSROOM.

NGUYEN: And you should always remember that CNN is the place for extensive coverage of today's primaries. Tonight, at 7:00 Eastern, the best political team on TV break down the results from Indiana and North Carolina.

HARRIS: Oil prices surging to another record high. Climbing to almost $121 a barrel today. (Intraday)ph trading worries about supply and a weak dollar fueling the rise. The gas prices declined a bit for the fifth day in a row. AAA reports the national average for a gallon of regular is $3.60. Down 0.1 of a cent from yesterday. Do you feel that in your wallet? Diesel down a little bit as well. $4.23 a gallon and get this, a new CNN research corporation poll shows 44 percent of Americans think it is very likely that we will be paying $5 a gallon for gas before the year is over.

NGUYEN: Goodness, that comes on the heels of the fact that we learned just a little bit earlier that crude oil has indeed hit $121 per barrel and some change. So, that's a new record high for you.

Your house, well, it may not be worth as much as you thought. A new study shows home values dropping 7.7 percent in the first quarter of this year. That's more than half of the homes purchased in 2006. They are now worth less than the buyers owe on their mortgages. It's called upside down. That's according to the Web site zillow.com which tracks home prices. 2006 was the year the housing market peaked. Keep watching CNN. Our money team has you covered whether it's jobs, debts, housing, or savings. Join us for a special report called "Issue #1, the economy." It's all this week at noon Eastern.

HARRIS: A rising death toll in Myanmar this morning. State radio is now reporting that as many as 22,000 people were killed in the cyclone. That number could still rise. Some relief groups are sending humanitarian aid to the country formerly known as Burma. But the United Nations says it is being forced to wait to get its disaster response team into the country. Many villages in the southern part of the country were literally flattened by the storms. CNN's Dan Rivers is the only western journalist reporting from the area. He describes the scene of total destruction with nearly all the homes in one town, (Bugale)ph wiped out. Survivors desperately need food and clean drinking water. The U.N. says as many as a million people could now be homeless. Can you imagine that. Reaching out to Myanmar. President Bush promising to help but there is a roadblock. We will tell you why the U.S. military is stuck standing by. NGUYEN: Let's get a check of the weather. You know, we look at Myanmar and all that devastation. Rob, the question today is are they going to have enough good weather to get something back on track?

ROB MARCIANO, CNN, METEOROLOGIST: You know, they got - still some showers around. This is pretty - actually, fast forward, but anyway, I wanted to show you a close up of southern Myanmar. Just this delta here, very low land and susceptible to the storm surge. This is where most of the fatalities were. This is a high resolution satellite picture of typically the water would stop here. But the flooding came all the way inland and some parts all the way up there. So, just definitely some dramatic stuff happening there.

All right, back to the states we go. We have a track for severe weather today in northern parts of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and through Nebraska as well later on today. We are already starting to see some good flow in from the Gulf of Mexico. Some decent dynamics coming out of the Rockies. We've got to get the first batch of thunderstorms to roll through and recharge the atmosphere in order to get more damaging winds, large hail and the potential for tornadoes later on this afternoon.

Here is the first batch. Oklahoma down through Dallas, we showed you some of the action going through Dallas. This is the weakening a little bit. And things will probably be refire back here, I think, later on today. As we start to get the sun back into those clearing skies. There's that line moving through Garland, playing on McKinney. You are going to be done with it pretty soon. Still Webb County, and through Laredo, you will continue to get heavy rainfall. Big time flooding there yesterday across the Rio Grande. And more flash flooding potentially there today. Greensburg, Kansas, tops the list of our 24 hours rain tally, four inches yesterday. Houston, 3.45 inches and San Antonio. Quick check on Raleigh.

HARRIS: There you go.

MARCIANO: How about that?

HARRIS: Way to go, way to go

MARCIANO: No. You threw everybody off Tony when you made demands about getting Dallas. So, they threw this up. And it confused the heck out of me because I was throwing storms in Dallas.

NGUYEN: You don't see any rain. Yes.

MARCIANO: So, to clarify in the last half-hour, we threw up the this shot and said it was Dallas. Thanked WFAA well in fact it's WRAL.

HARRIS: Yes.

MARCIANO: And we have nobody but Tony to blame.

NGUYEN: It's all his fault. He called for it.

HARRIS: And all the folks in Raleigh sending Rob e-mails. What are you?

NGUYEN: Talking about.

MARCIANO: I m well hated there, thank you.

HARRIS: Well, let me tell you something. It works perfectly because we are going to -- no, it is not Raleigh. We're going to take you to Winston-Salem, North Carolina, right now. And John McCain on stage. Let's listen in.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And I was honored to speak here at graduation several years ago, which was a great honor, Wake Forest. It is one -- not only one of the most beautiful institutions but it's one of the institutions of higher learning that continues under great leadership to be one of the leading institutions in America. And I'm honored to be here on this beautiful day.

I know exam week involves some tough moments and like when you are up at 3:00 a.m. and have to choose between studying and watching one of Fred's old movies. Most of the students here look confident and ready. So you need no advice from me as final exams draw near. But for those of you who might be feeling a slight sense of panic coming on, all I can say is that a few bad grades don't have to be the end of the road. So, just give it your best and move on.

I am living proof -- [ applause ] I am living proof that an undistinguished academic record can be overcome in life. Or at least that's the hope that has long, long sustained me. Your kind invitation here at Wake Forest brings me here as a candidate for president of the United States. And anyone in that pursuit has plenty of promises to make and to keep. When it is all over, however, the next president will be compelled to make just one promise. The same words that 42 others have spoken when the moment arrived. The framers of our constitution had a knack for coming right to the point. It shows in the 35-word oath that ends with a pledge to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution itself. This is what we require and expect of every president. No matter what the agenda or loyalties of party. All the powers of the American presidency must serve the constitution and thereby protect the people and their liberties.

For the chief executive or any other constitutional offers, the duties and boundaries of the constitution, are not just a set of helpful suggestions. They are not just guidelines to be observed when it is convenient. And loosely interpreted when it isn't. The clear powers defined by our constitution and the clear limits of power lose nothing of their relevance with time because the dangers they guard against are found every time.

In America, the constitutional restraint on powers is fundamental as the exercise of power and often more so. If the framers knew that these restraints would not always be observed, they were idealists. They were idealists. But they were worldly men as well. And they knew that abuses of power would arise and need to be firmly checked. Their design for democracy was drawn from their experience with tyranny. Suspicion of powers ingrained in both the letter and spirit of the American constitution. In the end, of course, their grand solution was to allocate federal power three ways. Reserving all other powers and rights to the states and to the people themselves. The executive, legislative and judicial branches are often wary of one another's successes. And they should be. They seek to keep each other within bounds and they are supposed to and although you wouldn't always know it from watching the day-to-day affairs of modern Washington. The framers knew exactly what they were doing. And the system of checks and balances rarely disappoints. There's one great exception in our day, however. And that is the common and systematic abuse of our federal courts by the people we entrust with judicial power.

For decades now, some federal judges have taken it upon themselves to pronounce and rule on matters that were never, never intended to be heard in courts or decided by judges. With a presumption that would have amazed the framers of our constitution and legal reasoning that would have mystified them, federal judges today issue rulings and opinions on policy questions that should be decided Democratically. Assured of lifetime tenures, these judges show little regard for the authority of the President of the Congress and the States. They display even less interest in the will of the people. And the only remedy available to any of us is to find, nominate, and confirm better judges.

Quite rightly, the proper role of the judiciary has become one of the defining issues of this presidential election. It will fall to the next president to nominate hundreds, hundreds of qualified men and women of the federal courts and choices we make will reach far, far into the future. My two perspective opponents and I have very different ideas, very different ideas, about the nature and proper exercise of judicial power. We would nominate judges of a different kind, a different caliber, a different understanding of judicial authority and its limits.

The people of America, the people of America, voters in both parties, whose wishes and convictions are so often disregarded by unelected judges, are entitled to know what those differences are. Federal courts are charged with applying the constitution and laws of our country to each case at hand. There's great honor in this responsibility. And an honor is the first thing to go. The first thing to go when courts abuse their power. The moral authority of our judiciary depends on judicial self-restraint. But this authority quickly vanishes when a court presumes to make law, to make law instead of apply it.

A court is hardly confident to check the abuses of other branches of government when it can't even control itself. One justice of the court remark in a recent opinion that he was facing a conclusion on "my own experience." Even though that conclusion found no support in the constitution or an applicable statute or in the record of the pace in front of it. Such candor from the bench is rare and even commendable. But it was not exactly news that the court had taken to setting aside the facts and the constitution in its review of cases and especially, especially in politically charged cases.

Often political causes are brought before the courts that couldn't succeed by Democratic means. And some federal judges are eager to oblige politicians, sometimes contribute to the problem as well. Politicians themselves contribute to the problem because we advocate our responsibilities and let the courts make the decisions for us. One abuse of judicial authority inspires more. One act of raw judicial power invites others. And the result over many years has been a series of judicial opinions and edicts wandering farther and farther from the clear meanings of the constitution, and from the clear limits of judicial power that the constitution defines.

Sometimes the express will of the voter is disregarded by federal judges. As in the 2005 case concerning an aggravated murder in the state of Missouri. As you might recall, the case inspired a Supreme Court opinion to left prosperity with a lengthy discourse on international law, the constitutions of other nations, the meaning of life, and, "evolving standards of decency." These meditations were in the traditions of penumbras, emanations, and other area constructs the court has employed over the years as poor substitutes for clear and rigorous constitutional reasoning. The effect of that ruling in the Missouri case was familiar, too. When it finally came to the point the result was to reduce the penalty, disregard our constitution and brush off the standards of the people themselves and their elected representatives.

The year 2005 also brought the case of Suzette Kilo before the United States Supreme Court. Here was a woman whose home was taken from her because the local government and a few big corporations had designs of their own on the land she was getting and she, and she was getting in the way. It is hardly a clear principle in all the constitution that the right of private property. There is a very clear standard in the constitution requiring not only just compensation for the use of eminent domain, but also the private property may not be taken for public use. But apparently that standard has been evolving, too.

In the hands of a narrow majority of the court, even the basic right of property doesn't mean what we all thought it meant since the founding of America. A local government seized the private property of an American citizen. It gave that property away to a private developer. And this power play actually got the constitution --

HARRIS: We are going to interrupt for just a moment. The remarks from John McCain at Wake Forest University as he articulates his conservative judicial philosophy. Let's take a quick break. We will come back on the other side of the break and bring you more of John McCain's remarks from Wake Forest University.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NGUYEN: On the campaign trail this hour, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, you see there, John McCain speaking about the judicial philosophy. Let's take another listen.

MCCAIN: ... confusion instead of clarity in our vital national debates. To leave resentment instead of resolution and it turns in the confirmation hearings into a gaunt of abuse. Over the years, we have all seen the dreary results that now pass for advice and consent in the confirmation of nominees to our Supreme Court. We have seen and heard the shabby treatment accorded the nominees -- the caricatures, the cold words, shouted, whispered, the 20-minute questions and two-minute answers.

We have seen disagreements redefined as disqualifications. The least infraction of approved doctrine pounced upon by senators and their staff and their allies and the media, always hanging in the air over these tense confirmation battles is the suspicion that maybe, just maybe, a nominee for the court will dare to be faithful to the clear intentions of the framers and do the actual meaning of the constitution.

Then the old tactic of abuse or delays out of bounds. Until the nominee is declared in trouble and the spouse is in tears. Of course, the daily routine of Senate obstructionist, presidential nominees to the lower courts are now lucky if they get a hearing at all. [ applause ] These courts were created long ago by the Congress itself on what then seemed safe assumption that future senate was attend to their duty to fill them with qualified men and women nominated by the president.

Yet, at this very moment there are 31 nominations pending. Including several for the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that serves North Carolina. Because there are so many cases with no judges to hear them, a judicial emergency has been declared here by the administrative office of the United States Courts. And a third, one- third of the entire Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is vacant. The alarm is yet to sound for the Senate majority leadership. Their idea of a judicial emergency is the possible confirmation of any judge who doesn't meet their own narrow interests of party and ideology. They want federal judges who will push the limits of constitutional law and to this end pushed the limits of Senate rules and simple courtesy.

As my friend and colleague, Senator Tom Coburn, of Oklahoma points out, somehow the very same senators can always find time to process earmark spending projects. But months, months, even years go by. And even, even then they can't get around to voting on judicial nominations to meet a basic Senate duty under our constitution. If a lobbyist shows up wanting another bridge to nowhere, or maybe even a courthouse with a friend's name it, that request will be handled by the Senate with all the speed and urgency of important state business.

But when a judicial nominee arrives to the senate, a nominee to preside in a courthouse and administer justice, and he or she better settle in. Because the Senate majority has other business and other priorities. Things almost got even worse a few years ago. When there were threats of a filibuster to require 60 votes for judicial confirmation and threats and reply of a change in Senate rules to prevent a filibuster. A group of senators, nicknamed "The Gang of 14." I never liked that name, by the way, got together. We got together and agreed we would not filibuster unless there were "extraordinary circumstances." This parliamentary truce was brief, but it lasted long enough to allow the confirmation of Justices Roberts, Alito, and many other judges. And it showed that serious differences can be handled in a serious way, without allowing Senate business to unravel in a chaos of partisan anger. Here, too, Senators Obama and Clinton have very different ideas from my own. They are both lawyers themselves, and don't seem to mind at all when fundamental questions of social policy are preemptively decided by judges instead of by the people and their elected representatives. Nor have they raised objections to the unfair treatment of judicial nominees.

For both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, it turned out that not even John Roberts was quite good enough for them. Senator Obama in particular likes to talk up his background as a lecturer on law, and also as someone who can work across the aisle to get things done. But when Judge Roberts was nominated, it seemed to bring out more the lecturer in Senator Obama than it did the guy who can get things done. He went right along with the partisan crowd, and was among the 22 senators to vote against this highly qualified nominee. And just where did John Roberts fall short, by the Senator's measure? Well, a justice of the court, as Senator Obama explained it -- and I quote -- should share "one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy."

These vague words attempt to justify judicial activism -- come to think of it, they sound like an activist judge wrote them. And whatever they mean exactly, somehow Senator Obama's standards proved too lofty a standard for a nominee who was brilliant, fair-minded, and learned in the law, a nominee of clear rectitude who had proved more than the equal of any lawyer on the Judiciary Committee, and who today is respected by all as the Chief Justice of the United States. Somehow, by Senator Obama's standard, even Judge Roberts didn't measure up. And neither did Justice Samuel Alito. Apparently, nobody quite fits the bill except for an elite group of activist judges, lawyers, and law professors who think they know wisdom when they see it -- and they see it only in each other.

I have my own standards of judicial ability, experience, philosophy, and temperament. And Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito meet those standards in every respect. They would serve as the model for my own nominees if that responsibility falls to me. And yet when President Bill Clinton nominated Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsberg to serve on the high court, I voted for their confirmation, as did all but a few of my fellow Republicans. Why? For the simple reason that the nominees were qualified, and it would have been petty, and partisan, and disingenuous to insist otherwise. Those nominees represented the considered judgment of the president of the United States. And under our Constitution, it is the president's call to make.

In the Senate back then, we didn't pretend that the nominees' disagreements with us were a disqualification from office even though the disagreements were serious and obvious. It is part of the discipline of democracy to respect the roles and responsibilities of each branch of government, and, above all, to respect the verdicts of elections and judgment of the people. Had we forgotten this in the Senate, we would have been guilty of the very thing that many federal judges do when they overreach, and usurp power, and betray their trust. The surest way to restore fairness to the confirmation process is to restore humility to the federal courts. In federal and state courts, and in the practice of law across our nation, there are still men and women who understand the proper role of our judiciary. And I intend to find them, and promote them, if I am elected president of the United States.

(APPLAUSE)

NGUYEN: We have been listening to Senator John McCain speaking today in Winston Salem, North Carolina, laying out his judicial philosophy. He is on the campaign trail. It's a big day, as we know, both Indiana and North Carolina going to the polls in the Democratic primary there today. So we are all over the latest information as these candidates reach out to voters today.

HARRIS: Reaching out to Myanmar. President Bush promising to help, but there's a roadblock. We'll tell why you the U.S. military is stuck standing by.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: The United States promising aid to Myanmar, but there is a catch. Here is what President Bush said a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRES. OF THE UNITED STATES: Burma has been hit by a terrible natural disaster. Laura and I and members of the Senate and the House here express our heartfelt sympathy to the people of Burma. The United States has made an initial aid contribution, but we want to do a lot more.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS: CNN's Barbara Starr is at the Pentagon for us this morning. Barbara, great to see you.

Barbara, if you could, explain to us, bottom line for us, what is holding up the U.S. assistance?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: What is the hitch, Tony. Well, the U.S. can only put assistance into Myanmar, known as Burma in some places, if the military government, the Junta that rules there, agrees to take the assistance. The U.S. military is the largest humanitarian relief organization in the world. They are on standby, they ready to help, but they need to see a request. They can't go in there if the government doesn't agree to it in that very now devastated country.

Here's how it lays down. Off the east coast of Thailand right now, there are a number of U.S. Navy Warships. They are there as part of an international exercise that is ongoing. They can start moving some of those you U.S. Navy ships quickly, especially the U.S. Essex. That has a number of helicopters on board, the exact type of equipment they can get into some of the remote devastated areas where there may be no roads, no landing strips, no port facilities.

So, they could start moving but they wouldn't still be there for about four, or five days. What the U.S. needs to see first is for the government in Myanmar to accept a U.S. disaster assessment team. Let the experts get in there, let them see exactly what's needed, what they can do, and how quick they can get the aid there. Then once that government agrees to take the aid, the U.S. will start moving.

One of the biggest needs, of course, according to all international aid agencies, is water. Safe water to drink. The U.S. military has a lot of expertise in bringing in remote water purification facilities. That's something they could get on the ground very quickly. Tony?

HARRIS: Well, here is where I'm a little bit confused, Barbara. It seems to me that the United States government we all know -- sitting hearing, we know what the folks in Myanmar need right now. They need some food and they need some water.

I'm wondering in the interim until there is clearance given by the junta, is this a situation where the United States could actually drop off these assets of food and water, say in Thailand and let the other agencies that have clearance to get into the country do that work?

STARR: That's certainly a possibility. You know the U.S. military certainly wants to help, but doesn't want to overstep with some sort of heavy footprint. They can give the aid to other aid agencies, get them to move it in. They can get, as you say, we have seen I believe the military in Thailand begin to pack up in things and get them in there.

But some of this like water purification, the U.S. has the systems, the capability they can put it on the ground and start running it and showing people how to run it. A lot of expertise in doing this, the U.S. did it in tsunami, they did it in an earthquake in Pakistan. And, of course, getting those U.S. military helicopters in there, it is a special expertise.

I think what people are really talking about is the devastation is so overwhelming. This is another situation that will require an international effort, and the President made clear just a short time ago that he wants the U.S. to help in all of this. Tony?

HARRIS: Barbara Starr for us at the Pentagon. Barbara, great information. Thank you. We know you may actually want to help out. At CNN.com we have a special page on the devastation in Myanmar complete with links to aid agencies that are organizing help for the region. It is a chance for you to impact your world. Let us be your guide.

NGUYEN: This morning there is a global manhunt for a suspected sexual predator. A man seen in hundreds of is Internet photos, abusing young boys. CNN's Phil Black is following this disturbing story from London. What do you know about this guy, Phil? PHIL BLACK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Betty. Yes, well this is a man that as you say Interpol, the international police organization has launched a worldwide search for. We can take a look at him. Police say that they have ran 100 images of this man which show him sexually abusing at least three boys. Aged between six and ten. The images were found on a computer in Norway belonging to a pedophile there.

They think the images were taken in southeast Asia somewhere. They don't know much more than that. They don't know his name. They don't know his nationality. They really don't have much to go on here. They have been looking for this man since 2006. So now they believe children could still be at risk, and have made the decision to go public. Let's here Interpol talking now about their reasons for this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KRISTIN KVIGNE, ASST. DIR., INTERPOL: We're doing this appeal now, because all lines of police investigation has failed. We believe that this man, because there are so many images out there and he's linked to several children, is someone that can abuse again. Can and will abuse again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACK: Interpol believes that these images are very clear, and that someone, somewhere must know who this guy is. Betty?

NGUYEN: It reminds me of a case last year where Interpol went public with another guy who faced similar charges. His face was obscured in the pictures that Interpol had.

BLACK: That's right. This is only the second time Interpol has mounted an appeal like this. The last time was in October of last year, a man named Christopher Paul Neil. He tried to be clever about it. Interpol said there were images of him on the net that showed him with children, but use a swirl, a digital effect to try and hide his face. They were able to undo that effect.

They released the images globally, and he was tracked down in just a matter of days to Thailand, where he is now facing child sex charges. Interpol is hoping for a similar result in this case. Betty?

NGUYEN: Well, we have put his picture up, and maybe somebody knows something. Phil Black joining us live. Thank you, Phil.

HARRIS: Very quickly now, let's get you to the New York Stock Exchange for a look at the big board. Just outside of an hour into the trading day. As you can see the DOW started off in negative territory, and remains there. Down 62 points. The NASDAQ down eight. When we come back after the break, we will give you a full market check with Susan Lisovicz right here in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) NGUYEN: Welcome back, everybody. I'm Betty Nguyen, and you are in the CNN NEWSROOM. You know what? They are not hacks when it comes the issues. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: War on terrorism or whatever is going on in Iraq.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One of the main things is health care. You have millions of people that don't have health care.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I never had -- health insurance, you know. I can't afford it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The economy, number one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NGUYEN: Coming up, cabbies on the campaign.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: Today's primaries, big day, big stakes for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Let's crunch the numbers. Indiana, 72 delegates up for grabs. It is the second largest delegate prize left in the presidential race. The biggest: North Carolina. Clinton and Obama competing for 115 delegates there.

And remember, CNN is the place for extensive coverage of today's primaries. Tonight at 7:00 Eastern, the best political team on television breaks down the results from Indiana and North Carolina.

NGUYEN: Well, huffing and puffing, a volcano puts on a show today, a performance 9,000 years in the making.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NGUYEN: Want you to take a look at these incredible pictures and amazing detail behind them. Look at that. These are the latest pieces of video coming from a volcano blowing its top in Chile. Check out the massive cloud of ash right there. 4,000 people left the area in the last five days and officials just expanded the evacuation. Listen to this. Researchers say this is the first time the volcano has erupted in almost 9,500 years. I guess it was due.

HARRIS: Yes, and no quiet day on the greens in Las Vegas. Check this out. A suspected thief ditches the car when it stops running. Here we go. He makes off on foot, jumping a fence, and running across a golf course -- ouch. Watch, he's going to next -- there it is. He grabs the golf cart. The cart belonged to maintenance crews. When they saw what was happening, they took off after him. Let the chase begin.

NGUYEN: Oh my goodness. HARRIS: Yes, yes, they wound their way around the course, even in a tunnel, under the road. The whole thing, as you can see caught on tape by a television helicopter.

NGUYEN: He's running now.

HARRIS: The suspect finally -- you're right, he's had it. He's tired.

NGUYEN: Just take me in. I'm done.

HARRIS: He's pooped. I'm done.

NGUYEN: Exhausted.

HARRIS: Take me in.

NGUYEN: Oh goodness.

HARRIS: Yes.

NGUYEN: All right, let's talk about this. Indiana and North Carolina, they are voting today. The Democrats' long battle takes another step toward the end, though. We'll have the latest in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)