Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Gibbs Daily White House Press Briefing; F-22 Crashes in California; Analysis, Examination of President's Tuesday Night Briefing
Aired March 25, 2009 - 14:59 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Taking you straight to the White House, Robert Gibbs just stepped up to the mike. We're going to listen in.
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: ... sandbags and additional preparations.
Secondly, I want to announce the bilateral meetings that President Obama will hold in London next week at the G-20 summit, in addition to meeting obviously with Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the president will also meet with her majesty, Queen Elizabeth II.
On Wednesday, April 1st, President Obama will meet President Hu of China. Also on the 1st, President Obama will meet for the first time with Russian President Medvedev.
On Thursday, April 2nd, President Obama will meet with Indian Prime Minister Singh. In addition to the president of the Republic of Korea Lee. That's also on April the 2nd.
And, lastly, the president, as you know, has been on Capitol Hill this morning and is enormously pleased with the progress that both the house and the Senate are making on working toward a budget that reflects the priorities and the investments that he wanted to see in a budget. He's happy that those investments are on track to be made in this budget.
And he's also pleased -- bless you -- that the budget also fulfills his goal of cutting the budget deficit that he inherited in half over the course of his term in office.
Again, significant investments in health care reform, energy independence, and in education. So I'm sure there will be some more on that topic.
And with that...
QUESTION: Yes, sir, thank you. Can you just describe a little bit more fully the meetings that he had on the Hill, what some of the give-and-take was between them?
GIBBS: I would get a better read-out from -- Josh Earnest went up there with the president. I did not -- I did not travel with the president up to Capitol Hill today. I know that, to answer more broadly, as I just said, I think the president is enormously pleased with the progress that the two committees are making, that the progress demonstrates that what the president set up and what those two Budget Committees are working on is to make important investments, as I said, in health care reform, in ensuring that our children are educated for a 21st-century global economy, and to make necessary, needed investments in energy independence, all while cutting the budget deficit in half over the course of his term in office.
QUESTION: Just one quick follow-up and then just, quickly, a different topic. And did he come away with these meetings, do you think, with -- with any more certainty that Democrats won't be -- up to this point, Democrats have been almost as loudly critical of the budget as -- as Republicans in wanting certain changes made to it. Does he feel any differently about their -- Democrats' position after this meeting?
GIBBS: Well, let me -- let me focus, I think, on what Peter Orszag said in a conference call with some of you all this morning.
The budget documents that the House and the Senate are now considering bear about a 98 percent -- are about 98 percent the same.
So I know there's a tendency in this town to focus on the 2 percent of 100 percent that you might not be getting. The president prefers to focus on the 98 percent that -- that are in these budgets, that are similar or identical to what he hoped each of the -- each of the House and the Senate would do and, more importantly, as he's talked about and talked about last night, put our country on the path not just to renewed fiscal responsibility, but to making important investments that have long been delayed and instituting a strong foundation for long-term, continued economic growth.
And I think both these budget documents appear to be headed strongly in that direction. The president is -- is pleased with that.
QUESTION: Can you say anything about the F-22 crash in California?
GIBBS: I just saw it as I was coming out, and so I don't have anything on it, but we'll try to get something on it.
QUESTION: In the meeting the president had with the NATO secretary general today, was he able to brief him on the details of the Afghanistan review? And when is he going to make those details available to the public? And -- and in what format? Is he going to give a speech about it or...
GIBBS: I -- I -- I think it is -- when the -- when the president is -- is ready to make an announcement, obviously, we will -- that's likely to happen before we go overseas. And I would look for that as early as the next few days.
I know that the president spoke about it today in the meeting. I don't know to the degree to which he fully briefed on that, but, obviously, I think it's something you'll see as early as the next few days.
QUESTION: OK, just one other question on a very different topic. I just wanted to follow-up on the question that Major asked of the president last night about...
GIBBS: You mean Garrett?
(LAUGHTER)
QUESTION: I was just wondering...
GIBBS: Sorry (INAUDIBLE)
QUESTION: Is it -- is it a concern that -- that the president is even being asked about the status of the dollar at a time when he's going to the G-20 trying to show leadership on the economy, that questions are being raised about currency?
GIBBS: I don't blame Major at all for the question that he asked the president last evening. I'm kidding.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
GIBBS: No, no. I -- I -- no, I -- I...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Well, do you -- do you think that it -- it makes a statement about -- about the questions that are being raised abroad about the American economy and its strength and -- and the dollar?
GIBBS: No. The president's first job in -- when he walked into this White House was to do everything he could to strengthen our economy, to create jobs, to get it back on a sound footing, to put it on a path towards sustained economic growth, but also to acknowledge that we've gotten away from fiscal sanity and that this budget puts us back on a path towards doing something far more responsible with our budget.
I have said and the president has said now a couple of different times that America's the strongest and safest place to invest in the world, and I think that will continue to be the case for a long, long time.
But the president is -- the president's going to do what he thinks is in the best interests of the American people and getting the American economy growing and moving again. I think -- I think the steps that -- that have been taken thus far in the recovery plan and in financial stability plans, we've seen already domestically a drop in mortgage rates, some of which are attributable to the plan that was put forward to stabilize the housing market.
I -- I think the president is pleased with the progress that we've made, understanding that we've got a long way to go. And I don't think he's too worried about what other people might think about the actions that were taken. QUESTION: To focus on that 2 percent for a moment, is -- is the president at all disappointed that the middle-class tax cuts that he talked so much about on the campaign trail may not end up in the budget?
GIBBS: Well, let's understand what is -- what's already been signed into law...
QUESTION: Yes, for two years.
GIBBS: Right, let's -- but let's understand, again, that -- that within the first month of walking into the White House, the president got his middle-class tax cut, "Making Work Pay," for 95 percent of working families in this country to be law for the first two years of his administration.
Look, we're -- we understand that legislating is an active -- an active sport, but we've got now a couple of years to make decisions about how to include that for the long term. But, you know, again, I -- it's hard for me to focus exactly on what's going to happen, you know, in years three and four when I think we -- we feel pretty good about what we've gotten in years one and two.
Obviously, OMB announced today the creation of a task force to look into ideas of tax simplification and closing the tax gap in this country as a way of bringing about ideas -- bringing ideas forward as to how to make "Making Work Pay" permanent. It still remains one of the president's priorities.
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: There is a breaking news story that we're following for you right now.
This is one of the most sophisticated and most expensive planes in our military, and it has crashed, we're told, just off of California's Edwards Air Force Base.
That's what it looks like right there. It's called the F-22. There's more information on it that we're going to be giving you over the course of the next several minutes.
One pilot was on board, according to reports that we're getting right now. The condition is unknown at this time. There is a board of accident investigators all over this situation right now, trying to investigate the accident. This is a plane that's probably as advanced a technical fighter as exists anywhere in the military, also certainly one of the most expensive.
It uses stealth techniques to do what -- in fact, it's considered one of the stealth fighters in the fleet.
Chad Myers is joining us right now to try and bring us up to date on what we know.
Chad, where, when, what could possibly have done this?
CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Well, what could possibly have done it is a number of things. Obviously, they're still going to try and hopefully talk to the pilot, if he ejected.
The good news is, it did go down in a very flat area, in fact, Harper Dry Lake area. Here's L.A. Here's Edwards Air Force Base just slightly up there. A little bit father up to the north and to east of there would be Barstow. And Barstow, right there, Harper Dry Lake, Barstow, right at that intersection. And so at least we didn't know that it didn't get into a mountainous area.
Here's Edwards. This is where the shuttle would come down, one of the reserve, obviously, landing areas. They like to put it down in Florida, but, farther to the north, about 30 miles from the Air Force base, is where that Dry Lake area is near Barstow, and that's where the plane went down.
I'm just saying this because a dry lake bed is a very good place to put a plane down and survive it, compared to putting it down into a, you know, a 14,000-foot mountain.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: In fact, that's what the shuttle used to come down in the same area, right? It was a dry lake bed?
(CROSSTALK)
MYERS: Right. You bet.
SANCHEZ: And you know -- I know you kind of follow these things, so I will go ahead and throw this question out that I wouldn't ask of a normal weather guy.
MYERS: I will try.
SANCHEZ: This thing has stealth technology. It's very sophisticated. This is one of those planes that Fidel Castro in an interview once referred to as those invisible planes that the United States has.
MYERS: Well, you know, you see the tail. The sophistication, I guess, goes with the money, over $150 million per copy.
And, you know -- and you can put planes down, but you can't replace pilots, and so my thoughts right now are, where's that pilot? How's he doing or how's she doing, and did they make it out? You know, the planes can be replaced, Rick.
SANCHEZ: Point well made. And I thank you for that.
Chad Myers, you will be all over this. We will be checking back as the story develops.
Obviously, the big story that we're going to be following today has to do with not only what the president had to say yesterday, but what the president did today.
Today, the president went to the Hill. He was trying to do some arm-twisting, not of Republicans, but of Democrats.
And then there's Mr. Geithner. He was talking as well to the Council on Foreign Relations, two different takes on what happened, and a lot of questions about some of the answers and questions that were raised last night during the Barack Obama news conference.
Stay with us -- all of that and a whole lot more. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Once again, we have got some breaking news that we're going to be sharing with you throughout the course of this hour. And that is that an F-22 fighter jet has crashed out of California. It may very well have crashed in the Nevada desert. At least that's some of the last information that we got.
We got this right through -- I'm looking at now -- this is CNN wires releasing this information. I am going through this and scanning it as we speak, looking for anything that we haven't reported to you yet. It's a single seater. It crashed about an hour-and-a- half ago, reason still unknown, status of the pilot still unknown. Don't know if he's ejected.
Obviously, we're going to be all over this story as we get more information on this F-22A fighter jet, again, one of the most sophisticated, one of the most expensive planes in the world, militarily speaking. We will bring that to you right away.
Meanwhile, here's another story that we're going to be sharing with you, taking fire, but moving full steam ahead. The president goes to Congress. His economic point man goes to the Council on Foreign Relations, this while the mantra about his agenda being too big and too costly continues.
Here's the president's answer to that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: the alternative is to stand pat and to simply say, "We are just going to not invest in health care. We're not going to take on energy. We'll wait until the next time that gas gets to $4 a gallon. We will not improve our schools. And we'll allow China or India or other countries to lap our young people in terms of their performance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Meanwhile, as this show has been detailing for you, the lack of regulation at the same time that financial institutions paid billions to both Democrats and Republicans to have those regulations essentially removed has helped create this financial disaster.
Everyone seems to agree on that.
Bob Lenzner, Forbes.com, has been following this part of the story with us for weeks now.
And, Bob, you were there when Secretary Geithner talked about this today before the Council on Foreign Relations.
ROBERT LENZNER, NATIONAL EDITOR, "FORBES": Right.
SANCHEZ: What is he going to be doing about the lack of regulations that may have caused this situation?
LENZNER: Tomorrow morning, he's going to appear before Congress. He's going to propose tight regulatory changes, so that an AIG can never happen again, no more AIGs, no more AIG disasters. He's going to propose that holding companies that have insurance or broker dealer or a savings and loan or even commodity futures traders in their bailiwick will have to have a certain amount of capital, will have to have a certain amount of reserves, so that they can't just have leverage, they can't just do whatever they want.
And they're going to be watched much more carefully, and the government will be able to step in very quickly and do something about it if they do something that's too risky.
SANCHEZ: There's Geithner. We're looking at him. He's the man with the plan, as you're describing it. But this is something that has to be passed by Congress.
LENZNER: Right, absolutely.
SANCHEZ: This is something that has to be accepted and passed. They have got to go in there and say, we have got rid of all these default swap deals and everything that has gone on over the last 15 years.
(CROSSTALK)
LENZNER: I think that he will be on -- this will happen faster because this is not to spend a lot of money right now. It's to regulate these guys that created this chaos in the first place.
SANCHEZ: And critics are saying this is unconstitutional, though.
In fact, some critics are saying this is nothing but a left-wing power grab by Barack Obama.
LENZNER: No.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Do they have a point? What's your take?
LENZNER: No, that's absolutely ridiculous. It's absolutely ridiculous.
These -- that AIG was able -- was not regulated by anybody in the holding company level, and that's what got us into this jam. This was no left-wing grab. This is ridiculous. This is getting back in control of our financial system, the way it ought to be, in the public interest.
SANCHEZ: Let me ask you a question. The president met today with some Senate Democrats, and it's interesting because he obviously is going to need their support on this deal, right?
LENZNER: That's right.
SANCHEZ: And yet he's going to Senate Democrats in this case, but he seems to be willing to drop a key campaign pledge to get it. Now, notice what the Senate's chief budget writer didn't say today when he was asked by reporters what the president said.
Let's run this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. KENT CONRAD (D), NORTH DAKOTA: He asked the caucus what he asked me: Preserve my priorities, education, energy, health care. Reduce the deficit substantially.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: You notice he didn't talk about that middle-class tax cut that the president had made a priority in the past. What gives?
LENZNER: Well, it seemed rather clear at the press conference last night that he was letting the air out of that bubble, as well as the carbon tax.
He didn't seem -- and the -- his -- the press secretary, Gibbs, just more or less said, we will worry about this middle-class tax cut, unfortunately, in years three and four of the first administration, not years one and two.
SANCHEZ: I wonder if that's going to have some political repercussion. We may be talking about that in our next segment.
Bob Lenzner, as usual, Forbes.com, thank you, sir, for being with us.
LENZNER: Not at all. I'm glad to be here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: ... strategy to create jobs, to help responsible homeowners, to restart lending, and to grow our economy over the long term. And we're beginning to see signs of progress.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: China is in the news, and the president is reminded by a FOX News reporter that China is run by communists.
And, before Obama, they were run by what? What? Wall Street traders? Bolsheviks? Girl Scouts?
Also, we have told you a lot about those AIG bonuses, you know, the guys who got them? Well, they ain't talking. But their lawyer is. And I'm going to talk to one of those lawyers, right here, and you will hear it, fair and balanced.
Stay with us.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Hey, this is Rick Sanchez. Thanks for calling.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, hi, Rick. Just calling -- I'm calling from Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, to say you're doing an excellent job. I love CNN. And up here in Canada, we think you guys are great. So, keep up the good work. See you later. Bye.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Those of you who watch us regularly know that we're interactive, so we want to hear what you have to say about what we're talking about as well.
Let's go to our Twitter board, if we possibly can.
This is Tseday, who says: "Socializing the debt and privatizing the profit, the new America. What a shame" -- a response to my conversation moments ago with Bob Lenzner.
We thank you for that.
I grew up watching baseball and my dad used to put me to sleep with baseball stories, me and my brothers. Jackie Robinson, he would often talk about. Jackie Robinson was never allowed to admit pain, emotionally or otherwise. As the first black baseball player, his job was to just grin and bear it.
He also knew that he couldn't be ordinary. He had to be somehow transformational. But he couldn't talk about being a black baseball player. The only thing Jackie Robinson could really talk was being a baseball playing, sans the black.
Consider that now as you watch Barack Obama last night answer this question from Ann Compton.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANN COMPTON, ABC RADIO: Could I ask you about race?
OBAMA: You may.
COMPTON: Yours is a rather historic presidency. And I'm just wondering whether, in any of the policy debates that you've had within the White House, the issue of race has come up or whether it has in the way you feel you've been perceived by other leaders or by the American people? Or has the last 64 days before a relatively color- blind time?
OBAMA: I -- I think that the last 64 days has been dominated by me trying to figure out how we're going to fix the economy, and that affects black, brown and white.
And, you know, obviously, at the inauguration, I think that there was justifiable pride on the part of the country that we had taken a step to move us beyond some of the searing legacies of racial discrimination in this country, but that lasted about a day.
And -- and, you know, right now, the American people are judging me exactly the way I should be judged. And that is: Are we taking the steps to improve liquidity in the financial markets, create jobs, get businesses to re-open, keep America safe? And that's what I have been spending my time thinking about.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Joining me now is A.B. Stoddard from "The Hill."
On a daily basis, Obama's referred to as a guy who can't think without a teleprompter. He's taken apart for his policies and for his TV appearances. You almost get the feeling he didn't say what he really wanted to say when he was asked that question, because he couldn't. Am I wrong?
A.B. STODDARD, ASSOCIATE EDITOR, "THE HILL": Well, there was a very honest moment. The only smile of the night, the only joke of the night was in that answer, when he said, I think that jubilation, that pride on Inauguration Day lasted about a day.
It was his lightest moment of a rather serious and measured and almost somber press conference.
SANCHEZ: But this is not a dumb guy.
STODDARD: No.
SANCHEZ: Despite the fact that a lot of the folks on the right say he's so dumb, he has to read everything that he says, which I don't think anybody buys for a minute.
He knows what they're saying. And the instinct for any one of us, any guy, certainly anybody in just about any business, male or female, is to say, I'm not going to take this.
But he he's not going there. He can't go there. And, in large measure, it's because of who he is, the first black president.
STODDARD: Well, he -- he -- he tends, I think, to back away. He was going to be the post-racial candidate and the post-racial president.
I think, on this general subject, he tends to back away. Look, he gave a groundbreaking speech on race in Philadelphia a year ago this month. He's not talked about it since. I think, generally, last night, I think he uses a teleprompter because he is a cautious guy.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
STODDARD: And he's a disciplined person. And, after the most explosive week of his young presidency, he wanted to stay with the script.
SANCHEZ: Take a listen to this question from FOX News' Major Garrett. It's a good question, by the way, about a very important issue that we raised last week on this show.
STODDARD: Yes.
SANCHEZ: So, I'm not knocking the question here. It's about China's doubts about U.S. currency, something, again, that we have talked about. But watch how he throws in the word communism. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAJOR GARRETT, FOX NEWS: I wonder, sir, as a candidate who ran concerned about the image of the United States globally, how comfortable you are with the Chinese government, run by communists, less confident than they used to be in the U.S. dollar and European governments, some of them center-left, some of them socialist, who say you're asking them to spend too much?
OBAMA: Well, first of all, I haven't asked them to do anything. What I have suggested is, is that all of us are going to have to take steps in order to lift the economy.
We don't want a situation in which some countries are making extraordinary efforts and other countries aren't with the hope that somehow the countries that are making those important steps lift everybody up. And so somebody's got to take leadership.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: It's really all about the question. I know, again, it's a legitimate issue. But I just don't recall that, during the Bush administration, when we were borrowing hundreds of millions of dollars from the Chinese to fight a war in Iraq, that FOX News reporters would ask President Bush questions about China and call them a country run by communists.
Fair or unfair?
STODDARD: This is true. I mean, whatever the intent of Major's question, obviously, if the socialists in Europe and the communists in China were happy with President Obama, he would be criticized for that, too, because they're socialists and communists.
So, obviously, what you saw in that exchange -- and it went on a little longer -- was Barack Obama taking the opportunity to remind everybody -- I mean, we know that he has made, his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, has made a major push with China, called them our most bilateral relationship, trying to stress our openings with them, our interdependence, and our shared trust as we go forward.
Barack Obama took the opportunity immediately to, once again, reaffirm that the United States is a -- is a healthy, safe investment, that, even in this moment of crisis, people around the world continue to make bets on our U.S. treasury, because they are the safest, strongest investment. And I think -- I mean, I think that he was not going to take any bait about communism, obviously.
SANCHEZ: Right, right.
And just to be clear, between -- maybe something has happened that I didn't know, but during the eight years of the Bush administration, it was the same people running China, right? They weren't Girl Scouts?
STODDARD: Nothing's changed. It remains the same.
SANCHEZ: OK. I thought maybe perhaps something has changed.
STODDARD: Right.
SANCHEZ: Thanks very much. A.B. Stoddard, great stuff. Hope to have you back.
STODDARD: Thanks, Rick.
SANCHEZ: This guy is on trial for domestic violence. He's trying to convince the judge that he's not really like that. until a fight breaks out between him and a witness and the judge -- that's right, the judge -- we're serious about this.
Also, nothing's worked so far to quell the violence in Mexico. Can Hillary Clinton change that? Can she?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: Two quick comments on our conversation, by the way, as we look at some of this. The long-awaited trip to Mexico by secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, is now underway. And there she is. Her mission is to keep the Mexican drug problem from becoming a U.S. problem, while many argue it already has.
CNN's Jill Dougherty is live in Mexico City -- Jill, the president is coming -- is committing, what, $700 million to the border problem.
Is it enough?
And how's it going to be used?
JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's going to be used in a variety of ways. They're really bringing together not only that money, but they're going to bring in personnel. There will be equipment, etc. So would -- is it enough?
Nobody really knows. But at least it's something. And, you know, Rick, I'd have to say, the debate is changing. Because you heard some comments by Hillary Clinton as she was coming in on the plane -- very interesting comments where she was talking very overtly about drug use in the United States. She said there is an insatiable demand for drugs in the United States. That is fueling the violence. And then she also says what's fueling the violence is the inability of the United States to stop the guns that are going over the border into Mexico, too.
Now, we've heard that from President Felipe Calderon. And, actually, President Obama has talked about that. But those were very strong comments.
The other thing that she's trying to do here is to get across the message that this relationship isn't just the drug/violence issue. It's also broader. And she's going to be talking about things like the economy, energy, clean energy, education, trade, etc.
And then finally, on that plane, she got into some of the cultural ties, because in this whole debate, it seems to be lost that there actually are very deep ties between these two countries. She even, Rick, mentioned that she had her honeymoon in Mexico.
SANCHEZ: Isn't it just important for the U.S. to be seen not just by Hispanics who live here in the United States, like myself and my family, but by other parts of the world, as a country that's willing to engage south of the border, since, really, for the longest time, whether it's been a Democrat in the White House or a Republican in the White House, you could make the argument, Jill, that Latin America has been ignored?
DOUGHERTY: Well, many people would say that, Rick. I mean it's not only Mexico. But that is the closest neighbor. And you kind of hear a little bit of that from Felipe Calderon, who's talking about the United States and this attitude that Mexico is totally to blame. Obviously, he's hearing -- hearing something different from the Obama administration. But Latin America -- I mean Brazil, let's get real...
SANCHEZ: Yes.
DOUGHERTY: These are the countries that are -- that are really moving ahead and affecting the world. And they get very little coverage.
SANCHEZ: Ecuador, Venezuela, obviously, Colombia. I mean there's some serious issues there. We are so glad that you were able to join us with this.
Thanks so much, Jill.
Was a political attack ad on Hillary Clinton made to look like a movie when it really wasn't?
Oh and there's a new movie about Hillary Clinton. Dennis Quaid will play him -- Mr. President.
Who will play her?
Also, should the president of the United States not be allowed to talk to Catholics?
Think about that.
And is this an ecumenical decision or a political decision?
And why is Newt Gingrich suddenly the authority on this question?
Newt Gingrich. Huh, think about that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KERRY: Hey, Rick, Kerry (ph) from Kansas City.
Regarding Geithner, I think even though he looks like a troll, maybe we should give him at least 90 days before we start criticizing him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: And welcome back.
I'm Rick Sanchez here in the World Headquarters of CNN.
We've got the ying and the yang of comments here now, as we always do. We want to know what you think. So let's start with our Twitter board, if we possibly can, right?
One writes: "So, referring to Communist China is a shot at Obama's socialist agenda. Are you kidding me?"
Obviously, that person just called the president a socialist.
Here's the next one right under that. Right under that. Go down. There you go: "It would have been nice if the media tracked Bush like they do Obama. Bush stayed under a rock and media allowed it. Got free pass."
Obviously, a dissent from the previous tweet.
Now let's go across and let's try and get some MySpace comments. Here we go: "Who knows if Hillary can do it or not?" -- referring to her trip to Mexico: "It doesn't hurt to try, does it?"
We thank you for your comments.
And now let's talk about this. Dennis Quaid has been chosen to portray President Bill Clinton in an upcoming movie about his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. To get the role he beat out -- listen to the competition. Are you ready?
Alec Baldwin, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Tim Robbins -- some major league guys. Hillary Clinton is going to be played by Julianne Moore. The working title for this movie is "Special Relationship." And then there's "Hillary
The Movie" -- the other movie. This is one's in the Supreme Court, where justices are deciding if this is really a movie, to be treated as such, or actually a political campaign hit. This is an interesting story.
Here's CNN's Mary Snow.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Who is Hillary Clinton?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARY SNOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's called "Hillary
The Movie" and it's now the star of a Supreme Court battle. Hillary Clinton herself has nothing to do with it. This 90 minute film, made by a conservative group, Citizens United, features outspoken Clinton critics.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hillary is really the closest thing we have in America to a European socialist.
SNOW: The film ran in theaters. But Citizens United also wanted to run TV ads and air the film on cable TV Video On Demand while Mrs. Clinton was running for president in 2008. The Federal Elections Commissions challenged it running during the primary season because the group refused to disclose corporate sponsors.
DAVID BOSSIE, CITIZENS UNITED: We should not have to have a burden of saying to the American people, this is a political ad when, in fact, our ad did not say vote for or vote against Hillary Clinton.
SNOW: The FCC ruled the film's underlying message was Hillary Clinton is unfit to be president. Its lawyers argued the ad should be subject to disclosure laws or voters would be unable to know who's funding the ad.
A three judge panel agreed.
The Supreme Court now is examining a case, that is built on the McCain-Feingold Act of 2002, which made revisions to campaign finance laws.
LARRY NOBLE, FORMER GENERAL COUNSEL, FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION: It's about money. It's about speech. And it's about the ability of corporations to influence elections through the direct use of the Treasury money.
SNOW: The consequences?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: If Citizens United wins this case, it will mean that independent groups like Citizens United will be able to do more negative campaigning, more advertising, more campaign activity closer to elections than they've been able to do in recent years.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
SANCHEZ: Take a look at this courtroom.
Judges are supposed to be impartial, right?
This one isn't. He takes sides a la WWF. This is must-watch video and you'll see it all right here.
Also, we've all got questions for those AIG executives who got the huge bonuses right?
Today we've got a guy on who can give us some of the answers. He's the attorney for one of those executives.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: We welcome you back to the World Headquarters of CNN.
I'm Rick Sanchez.
When the pitchforks come out, as they did last week, against the traders with AIG, who would collect $165 million in bonuses, the story seemed to have only one side -- they are the bad guys, we are the good guys. In fact, anybody associated with AIG, it seemed -- from custodians to the lady who probably answered the phones at the building -- had to be bad.
And then there's this letter of resignation printed in "The New York Times today and sent to CEO Ed Liddy from one of its executives. This guy was making a dollar a year and says that he was not part -- not part of the credit default swap scheme.
Here's part of what he write to Liddy: "You are as blameless for these credit default swaps as I am. You answered your country's call and you are taking a tremendous beating. But you are also aware that most of the employees of your Financial Products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. None of us should be cheated out of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes, but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house." Signed Jake DeSantis.
Oh -- and he's not going to give his bonus back, as apparently Mr. Liddy would ask. He goes on to say in that letter that he's giving the entire amount to charity before anybody else can get their hands on it.
Joining us is Attorney Gary Phelan, who represents a group of AIG employees who are not giving their bonuses back. And, by the way, we want to point out that you say DeSantis is not one of your clients.
All right. Thanks for being with us.
We appreciate it.
GARY PHELAN, REPRESENTS AIG EXECUTIVES: Thank you, Rick, for having me.
SANCHEZ: Here's your chance.
What didn't we get?
What didn't we understand while we were all in a heated pitch the last couple of weeks about these executives, these guys, some of whom you represent?
PHELAN: First of all, Rick, some of my clients are considering giving some or all of the bonus back. But I think the media only heard one side of the story, as it was fueled by politicians.
These are employees. They're not all rich executives. Their incomes span from multimillionaires to people who got bonuses like $1,000. And these were based on contracts that were conditioned on their staying at AIG. The retention bonuses are something that's very common in the industry.
SANCHEZ: How do you separate...
PHELAN: They stayed on.
SANCHEZ: How do you separate the wheat from the chaff in these cases?
Because we've been doing these stories and you know about these default swap schemes that we've been talking about. I mean those things, while legal, were certainly questionable.
How do you assure us that these people that you represent and some of the ones asking for the bonuses weren't the scoundrels who were involved in that little game that ended up cheating so many people?
PHELAN: Well, all I can say is most of the employees there were not working on any of these swap transactions. They were working on various matters -- in a wide variety of matters. But they were not working on those. Most of the people who were working on those are no longer with the company.
SANCHEZ: So when he says...
PHELAN: (INAUDIBLE)... SANCHEZ: So when he says at the end of his letter it's like punishing a plumber who did work on your house by not paying him just because the electrician screwed up and burned your house down, is he right?
Is he characterizing it correctly?
I know he's not one of your clients, by the way, but is that characterization correct?
PHELAN: Rick, I think absolutely. These -- some of these people are very well paid and certainly a lot of the public is upset at that. But this is what this industry pays. And they were paid to do a job. They upheld their end of the bargain. And they were repeatedly told in writing by AIG that we would be making these payments.
SANCHEZ: This is what Ed Liddy said last week when we were listening to him here about why the names of his employees shouldn't be released. I want you to take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EDWARD LIDDY, CHAIRMAN AND CEO, AIG: I'm just really concerned about the safety of our people. So let -- let me just read two things to you: "All the executives and their families should be executed with piano wire around their necks. My greatest hope."
"If the government can't do this properly, we, the people will take it in our own hands and see that justice is done. I'm looking for all the CEOs' names -- kids where they live, etc."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Is he right?
Would these folks have been in danger had the names been released?
PHELAN: Absolutely. And that's still a fear that they're living with every hour of every day, for themselves and for their families. The specter of having their names released is still out there. And it's what's being held over them in order for to get the -- to maximize the returns of the retention payment so that the New York attorney general, Andrew Cuomo, can have as much money as possible that he says he recovered.
SANCHEZ: Gary Phelan, thanks so much for taking the time to join us today and take us through this explanation.
PHELAN: Thank you, Rick.
SANCHEZ: All right.
Newt Gingrich suggests President Obama is not suitable to address Notre Dame's graduating class. Does he have a bit too much glass around his house to be saying this, even if there is a real rift going on between the Catholic Church on this issue?
We're going to be all over that story.
And then a suspect attacks his accuser in open court and the judge leaps into the fray.
And this -- I wonder if you'll see that video during the judge's re-election run?
We'll have the entire tape for you in just a little bit.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back.
I'm Rick Sanchez here in the World Headquarters of CNN.
We expected we'd get a lot of response on this AIG question and we did.
Let's get one in right away, if we can.
Let's go to Colin, if we can, on the Twitter board. And here it is. Colin says: "Jake DeSantis" -- the writer I -- the letter I read a little while ago: "He misses the point. This company was insolvent. These bonuses are taxpayer money that was not really AIG's."
We thank you, Colin Bauer, for your response.
I want to show you now a little piece of video, if we possibly can. What you're about to see is captured by a court surveillance camera in Florida. Now, here it is. I want you to watch this. Here comes the judge -- remember that expression?
Literally, that's Judge Ian Richards. We've highlighted him there for you. Watch what he does when the defendant tries to attack a witness who was calling him out for domestic violence.
Judge Richards literally steps into the fray. He goes to the jury box to tackle the defendant, who was pummeling the witness. The defendant is in jail. He's facing a new charge of -- what else -- domestic battery -- again. And this time they're tacking on resisting arrest, as well.
We'll let you know how that one turns out.
Newt Gingrich couldn't resist taking a shot at President Obama. He seems to infer that the president shouldn't talk to a Catholic university because of "values."
Should Newt Gingrich, thrice married, go there? Really?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back.
I'm Rick Sanchez.
Newt Gingrich is Twittering. Yes, this thing that we started right here on this little show is really catching on. But you've got to be careful what you tweet, lest you be questioned not so sweet. I couldn't resist it.
As is the case when a former speaker of the House suggests a standing president of the United States shouldn't be invited to speak to Catholics.
Let me read this one to you. It's a tweet: "It is sad to see Notre Dame invite President Obama to give the commencement address, since his policies are so anti-Catholic values," says Newt Gingrich.
Joining us now is Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, one of my favorite guests of all time.
Let me just go straight out with this one.
BILL DONOHUE, PRESIDENT, THE CATHOLIC LEAGUE: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: Is Newt Gingrich, Bill, the guy who should be telling the Catholic Church who is and is allowed to speak to them?
DONOHUE: No, I think it begins with Catholics and he's not a Catholic yet. I understand he's becoming a Catholic in a couple of weeks.
SANCHEZ: Yes, he is.
DONOHUE: And I think not only the Catholic community should look at this, but particularly the people at Notre Dame. It's their school. It's the board of trustees. It's the faculty, the students, the administrators, the alumni.
That's why the Catholic League has not put out any official statement on this.
But I do think it's tragic. I'll tell you what, my phones have been ringing off the hook since last Saturday. I think this broke maybe on Friday and people have been e-mailing the Catholic League and contacting us through our Web site. This is the most polarizing thing I've seen in the Catholic community in some time.
SANCHEZ: You know what, it's interesting -- by the way, let me just read you real quick, to be fair to the -- to the university. Here's what they say. They say: "The invitation to President Obama to be our commencement speaker should not be taken as a condoning or endorsing of his positions on specific issues regarding the protection of human life, including abortion, embryonic stem cell research."
You know, that's the point with all of this. As a Catholic, both you and I belong to a church that's always been very inviting.
Wouldn't this be like saying you and I, as Christians, should not be allowed to speak to a Jewish organization?
DONOHUE: I think there's a couple differences here, Rick. And that is this.
Number one, in 2004, the bishops put out a statement, "Catholics and Public Life" which said that you should not give an honorary position or platform to somebody whose views are that contrary to Catholic teachings.
Number two, if they invited him on to -- into the law school, for example, to be involved in a symposium, I think that's entirely a different matter altogether. The problem -- the problem gets kind of sticky when you start giving people awards. That's what -- that's what's really raised the hackles of a lot of Catholics.
SANCHEZ: Well and you know what?
For -- for Newt Gingrich -- look, let me just ask straight out.
Is this a hit?
Is this a political hit by Newt Gingrich?
Would Newt Gingrich have said this if it hadn't been the president speaking, if it had been anybody else?
Is he on the record in the past saying -- criticizing who Notre Dame invites?
DONOHUE: I don't know. But I can tell you, this. I mean any active Republican or Democrat -- and Newt certainly is -- is always going to be driven by politics. But look, you've got a situation here. You've got the local ordinary -- or the local bishop there in Fort Worth, who governs the South Bend, John D'Arcy, who says he's not going to go through the commencement exercises. You have Archbishop Chaput, a very outspoken and bright guy from Denver...
SANCHEZ: Yes, and...
DONOHUE: ...who's saying, you know...
SANCHEZ: ...and that's a...
DONOHUE: ...sign the petition.
SANCHEZ: And that's an ecumenical deal.
DONOHUE: Right.
SANCHEZ: I mean these guys are in the church and they have a right to have opinions on this.
DONOHUE: Right.
SANCHEZ: The question is, when a politician involves himself on this. And that's why I wanted to have you on.
Bill, we're out of time.
We'll get you back.
DONOHUE: Thank you so much.
SANCHEZ: Always will. Enjoy having you every time.
Thanks so much.
DONOHUE: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: All right. We're going to bring you the very latest on what happened earlier in the show with that plane that we told you about out in California. And your comments about this discussion that Bill and I just had.
Stay with us.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. We got a ton of comments from you after that conversation I just had with Bill Donohue. But I should share this one with you. Most of them, by the way, were very critical of former House Speaker Gingrich. Ann says: "I love all these politicians and public figures using Twitter, trying to be hip and slipping up. They don't realize the power. We do."
Thanks so much for being with us.
Let's take it over to -- let's take it over to Wolf Blitzer now in "THE SITUATION ROOM" -- Wolf, what you got?
WOLF BLITZER, HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": Rick, thank you.
