Return to Transcripts main page

Rick's List

Primary Winners and Losers; Did BP Lie?; FBI Was Tracking Joran Van Der Sloot for Extortion; President Criticized by RNC Chair

Aired June 09, 2010 - 15:00   ET

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

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: The idea that Joran van der Sloot could actually have been stopped by the FBI before he allegedly murdered someone in Peru is just one of the stories we're bringing you on the LIST.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ (voice-over): Here is what is making the LIST today.

Now we can see it in high-def, and the story behind the clarity is not good. Does this show BP lied?

REP. EDWARD MARKEY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Right from the beginning, they were told not to tell the truth about the larger amount of oil that was going out there.

SANCHEZ: Two senators, Markey and Nelson, livid. We will talk live to one of them.

SEN. BLANCHE LINCOLN (D), ARKANSAS: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Lincoln.

MEG WHITMAN (R), CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: What a great night.

SANCHEZ: Whitman.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

SANCHEZ: Haley, a big primary night for women. I will list the winners for you and the controversies.

And the case against Joran van der Sloot gets even more unbelievable. Was the FBI on the brink of nabbing him in a sting operation, but he got away, and then killed a woman in Peru? New revelations.

The lists you need to know about. Who's today's most intriguing? Who's landed on the list you don't want to be on? Who's making news on Twitter? It's why I keep a list.

Pioneering tomorrow's cutting-edge news right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE) SANCHEZ: Hello again, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez. Here we go. This is RICK'S LIST, your national conversation.

And we have something at the very top that I want to share with you. Chad's going to be joining me in just a little bit and we're going to be going through some of these very latest pictures that we have seen. These high-def pictures, I don't know if you guys at home have seen them, but they're pretty remarkable.

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yes.

SANCHEZ: And we're going to talk about those in just a little bit.

But, first, I want to show you something that may illustrate the frustration with the oily mess in the Gulf of Mexico the best. It's day 51 of the disaster. This is Diane Wilson that I'm about to show you. She's a distraught shrimper. She wrote a book on the environmental impact of the Gulf prior to this day.

There she is, where she disrupted a Senate hearing this morning by pouring oil all over herself. She was arrested, but not before she interrupted Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who is tied, many would argue, to big oil in Alaska.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R), ALASKA: It's been a couple weeks now since you have been before the committee. I think last time you were here, the -- the oil from the --

(CROSSTALK)

DIANE WILSON, SHRIMPER: We're tired of the bailouts and we're tired of being dumped on in the Gulf. I'm a commercial fisherman from the Gulf of Mexico, and we're tired of being dumped on.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let me announce (OFF-MIKE) to please exit the room and allow us to proceed with our hearing.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: "We are tired of being dumped on," they scream at politicians. More on that in just a little bit. Murkowski, by the way, is one of several Republicans who want to keep the cap on what oil companies pay for spills at $75 million. Imagine that for a moment. They would only pay $75 million, if they chose to, after all the damage that's been done in the Gulf of Mexico, which is, ironically enough, about how much they spend on campaign contributions to politicians each year.

Now take a look at this. These are new high-def pics of what the oil spill looks like underwater. Now, you can tell it's a little clearer, especially the one on the left. If we had such a clear shot of these from the very beginning, because this is not the oil spill now -- this is the oil spill back when it first started.

MYERS: No, no, this is after they cut the top off.

SANCHEZ: This is right after they cut the top off?

MYERS: Yes, so this was not -- this -- we have got to talk. We have got to chat about this.

SANCHEZ: OK. This is interesting, because I'm thinking, and as I bring Chad into this, if the pictures were as clear as they are --

MYERS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: -- why weren't they able to give us a more reasonable or more accurate estimate of exactly how much oil was leaking?

MYERS: Because that is after they cut the kink off.

SANCHEZ: OK.

MYERS: Remember I told you that they're saying it's going to be 20 percent more? And I'm going no way is it going to be 20 percent more. It could be 50 percent more.

SANCHEZ: Really?

MYERS: That's the picture after they cut the kink in the riser off. That's why it's coming out so bad. It came out like that for hours before they could get that cap on.

SANCHEZ: So, that's just right after they cut the cap off?

MYERS: When they cut the kink off.

SANCHEZ: Yes, obviously.

MYERS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: But we're not talking about them putting the cap back on yet.

MYERS: Not -- the cap is not on yet.

SANCHEZ: Well, haven't they had pictures in the past, prior to doing all the capping or cutting, where they could have given us a better estimate of exactly how much oil was getting out of the Gulf, and their estimates seemed to most scientists to be unreasonably low?

MYERS: These are not real-time pictures. This is not an image that is sent live from the bottom of the ocean up to some kind of receiver. This is a recording device that was sent down there to record how much in high-def oil was coming out. Now, to answer your question, yes, I believe they could have done this a number of times with a number of different leaks. And either they did it and they didn't want to us to know or they never did it.

SANCHEZ: Or they didn't want perhaps a little more specifically and accurately their shareholders to know.

MYERS: Big time. That's a 20-inch hole that you're seeing there. It looks like -- you know, it looks just something coming out of a garden hose. That's 20 inches around.

SANCHEZ: Yes, that's a lot. That's a lot.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: And we need to be fair, you're absolutely right. If the only picture we're showing is the one at which they had just cut the top cut off, of course it's going to look like a lot more oil is coming out. That's a good point on your part.

By the way, I want to show you something. You know, there's been a lot of talk about this. And I know it sounds a little goofy. It sounds goofy to me as well, but there's a lot of serious people actually having this conversation now.

People have raised the question as to why we didn't consider using the Russian model, which is -- I know this sounds crazy -- the nuclear option, actually using some kind of nuclear warhead that would go down like a bunker buster and deflate the oil reserve to the point where it would literally stop itself?

Here's a sound bite. I want you to take a look at this.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, Rick, this is Al (ph) from Spearfish, South Dakota.

And I see that there is a way to deal with the oil spill, a proven way at that depth. The Russians did it, and they nuked it. And I see nothing wrong with that. I think we could nip this in the bud right away, and with the least amount of damage to the environment, is just to nuke it. I think it would work. I really do.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: All right. Let's have the conversation. He thinks it would work. "I really do," he says.

There are some scientists out there -- we're still looking for one to book -- who would actually have the expertise to not only know nuclear energy, because nuclear energy is different from, you know, warhead material, military uses.

MYERS: Yes. Right. SANCHEZ: They say they actually could, like, because there's a reserve down there, that when they shoot the warhead way down far enough, it would almost implode on itself, causing the leak to stop. You say what?

MYERS: I say there's still too much pressure coming out. That would work on an older well that is being pumped out. This is artesian, which means all that oil that coming out of it --

SANCHEZ: Pressure and flow.

MYERS: -- it's already pressurized down there.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

MYERS: People ask me, why don't you just blow up a hurricane? Because all we're going to have is a nuclear hurricane, a radioactive hurricane. Why do I want that? It's not going to stop a hurricane.

One bomb is not going to stop a hurricane. But if you put a nuke down there and you blow up the casing and you blow up all the land around it and the entire continental -- the crust that's there fills in the hole, it may stop the leak.

SANCHEZ: But you would be radioactive in that area forever and ever.

MYERS: Of course you would. Of course.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

MYERS: And all the fish would be radioactive. You would have a whole different set of problems.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

MYERS: And it's not guaranteed that the gas and the oil couldn't work its way back up through what you have already drilled.

SANCHEZ: And create possibly --

MYERS: And then it's still leaking anyway.

SANCHEZ: Well, people are talking about it.

MYERS: Of course they are.

SANCHEZ: And we wanted to bring it to your attention as well, because it got to the point where it's almost viral in nature and it's worth discussing.

You and I will talk a little bit later. Thanks so much.

MYERS: Not going anywhere, sir.

SANCHEZ: Appreciate it, Chad. All right, then there's the survivors of the Deep Horizon disaster. They spoke with CNN's Anderson Cooper about the atmosphere on the doomed rig days before the explosion.

Here. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DOUG BROWN, BP EXPLOSION SURVIVOR: He ended up saying, "Well, this is how it's going to be." And they started reluctantly agreeing, and --

ANDERSON COOPER, HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER 360": You're saying the guy from BP won the argument, basically? He basically said, "Well, this is how we're going to do it"?

BROWN: Yes. That's what I remember, yes. He basically said, "Well, this is how it's going to be."

COOPER: Dan, do you think that, too, that this was about saving time and saving money for BP, for Transocean?

DANIEL BARRON III, DEEPWATER HORIZON EXPLOSION SURVIVOR: Yes. And it just bothers me that Transocean would let them. You know, as much as Transocean preaches safety, you know, it doesn't make sense that Transocean would just fold like that if it wasn't over money.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: There's also this piece of information I want to share with you now.

CNN has learned that there's a tape of Joran van der Sloot made during an FBI sting, allegedly showing him taking money. But he wasn't arrested, even though he apparently is on tape in a sting taking money in an FBI operation. Now, this is fascinating stuff. We have details on that and the woman he's confessed to killing in Peru. That's ahead.

Also, a supply convoy bound for American troops in Afghanistan -- look at these pictures -- has been attacked by Islamic militants. And here's the news in this, folks. This happened just on the outskirts of Islamabad. Islamabad is Pakistan's capital. Is the fighting that close to the capital of Pakistan? And, if that's so, what does it mean? That's next right here on the LIST. We're going to be right back.

Your national conversation continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Here is one of the most alarming stories of the day for any American who has been keeping an eye on what's going over there. Militants in Pakistan -- notice I did not say Iraq, I did not say Afghanistan -- I said Pakistan -- swarm and fire on a military convoy today. Now, that happens rather often. But here's the difference in this case. This attack was not on the border of Afghanistan, you know, just into Pakistan, as we always -- as we often say, you know, on the Waziristan border of the mountainous region where bin Laden is supposed to be hiding out.

It was right on the outskirts of Islamabad, Pakistan's capital. I mean, think about that. As you look at these pictures, trucks set on fire, there is something else about this. That convoy that you see right there that was hit, it was headed for American troops and NATO troops fighting in Afghanistan.

And several people have been killed.

Chris Lawrence is at the Pentagon. He's been following this story for us.

You know, Chris, it seems to me that the import of this story is the fact that I don't recall -- maybe you do, but I don't recall this vicious or as big an attack occurring that close to the center of Pakistan.

Hell, it's six miles from the capital, which many Americans think, oh, my goodness, is that where we're going to be at war next? Your thoughts.

CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Rick, you don't recall it because it hasn't happened before.

You know, you mentioned it -- or -- just a few minutes ago, yes, these attacks have occurred. They have always been in really remote parts of Pakistan, near the border of Afghanistan. You know, a Pentagon spokesman told me just a few hours ago -- he called this a vicious attack on a large convoy, hadn't seen anything like this, just six miles from the capital of Pakistan.

It raises some big questions. Now, the Pentagon spokesman said, well, you know, only 1 percent of our supplies actually come through that exact route into Afghanistan. But another defense official said, if the route around the capital starts to become unstable, he said that's the game-changer.

You know, the Pakistani military has already said they don't have the forces to patrol all these routes, that it's up to NATO to do it. So, if Pakistan starts to become unstable, it raises a lot of questions about getting supplies in on a timely basis.

SANCHEZ: Yes, raises questions, I bet. I mean, you know, most of us as Americans need to be concerned when we start seeing something like this happening and we cross our fingers and maybe say a little prayer that this doesn't become a trend that forces us be engulfed in a brand-new geographical area.

Now, let me ask you another question, moving over to Afghanistan. I understand that there was some kind of engagement there that may have cost the lives of some of your guys. LAWRENCE: It did, Rick.

You know, a helicopter was shot down by the insurgents today in Southern Afghanistan. Four Americans were on board that helicopter. You know, I got to tell you, this does not happen very often in Afghanistan. Most of the deaths that you see do not occur as -- as a result of the insurgents shooting down a helicopter.

Typically, they just do not have that kind of weapon. You know, they rely, you know, on a lot of RPGs, things like that. They don't have that -- that great supply of anti-aircraft weapons, so this is pretty unusual. Most of the helicopters that go down are due to mechanical failure or weather.

And then, when you put it into the bigger context, four Americans dead today, two killed in an IED explosion yesterday, seven killed in multiple attacks on Monday, that's 13, and we're only through Wednesday. This is already on track to be the deadliest year so far in Afghanistan, and it's the -- it's the ninth year that we're in there, Rick.

SANCHEZ: Chris Lawrence, our man at the Pentagon, my thanks to you for bringing us that report. Let us know if anything changes.

Now, take a look at this

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED BOY: It was just weird. I was, I'm supposed to be at Boston, not Cleveland. It was just weird.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: An airline entrusted to get a 9-year-old child to his destination sends him to the wrong city, to the wrong city. Imagine being the parent of that child looking to see where he is anywhere in the country.

Meanwhile, the woman who suggested that we outlaw alcohol beats the woman who says we should pay our doctors with chickens. Your election update coming up next on the LIST with Jessica Yellin. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We told you about the Lisa Murkowski resolution just a little while ago, and there's an update on this story. Murkowski is one of the Republicans who is saying that we should leave the cap for people like BP after doing damage in any part of the world to just $75 million.

The president disagrees. Here is now the president of the United States in a tweet that he sent just moments ago. There it is. He says: "It's time to move forward with comprehensive energy and climate legislation, and the Murkowski resolution is a clear step backwards," he writes. Well, the president has had a little fun with me from time to time, most recently at the Correspondents Dinner. So, show that again. I just want to -- if the president -- Mr. Obama, if you're watching, I just wanted you to know that there's really no s in the words backwards. That's incorrectly spelled. The word is backward, not backwards, just for the record.

Now time for the list of winners from yesterday's primary elections.

Jessica Yellin joins me live from California.

Nevada is where we start. The winner there may be Harry Reid. Huh? Rick, what are you talking about? Harry Reid wasn't in the race, says Jessica Yellin.

But, wait, Jessica, I have more. I'm having this conversation with myself while I talk to Jessica Yellin.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: All right. Here we go. Let's put up the graphic. Sharron Angle beat Sue Lowden, who lost a lot of her muster after suggesting we should pay our doctors with chickens to improve health care.

Here's what Angle says about legalizing medical marijuana. She's against it, by the way, but then goes on to say -- and this is interesting -- big quote -- "I feel the same about legalizing alcohol. The effect on society is so great that I'm just not a real proponent of legalizing any drug or encouraging any drug abuse."

Jessica, let me bring you in and ask you a very direct question. Is she saying there that she wants to make alcohol illegal? And haven't we been that -- through that -- down that road before? And is that why in part Harry Reid is pleased to have her as an opponent in the fall?

JESSICA YELLIN, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: In reverse order, yes. The fact that she said that is part of the reason Harry Reid is pleased to have her as an opponent in the fall. There's plenty of things she said that he can use against her that seem a little nutty.

Two, no, she does not want to bring back prohibition. Her campaign has made that clear. And as evidence, they say she's never introduced legislation on that. The bigger picture here, Rick, is that she did so well in part because the Tea Party endorsed her, but she has not had many years running a statewide campaign against somebody who is skilled at it as Harry Reid.

And the Democratic Party is already sending out previous quotes that she said that are trying to position her as just way too extreme. The Reid folks are quite pleased today.

SANCHEZ: All right, let's talk about another one now. Meg Whitman is now the Republican nominee for governor after beating Steve Poizner by spending $71 million of her own money.

YELLIN: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Do we have that graphic? We do. There it is. That's how they finished. Obviously, these things are going to change by percentage points from time to time. But here she is. Here's Whitman last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WHITMAN: When you give me the honor of being your next governor, the special interests --

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(LAUGHTER)

WHITMAN: -- the special interests and the public employee unions won't stand a chance, because I will owe my office to no one but you.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Jessica, a rich, really rich, woman spends her own --

YELLIN: Really rich.

SANCHEZ: -- money and wins. What happens in the fall for Whitman?

YELLIN: OK, Rick, for my money, this is -- may be the most exciting race in the country, partly because you have two very smart, able candidates who could run a truly substantive, but also a dogfight of a campaign against each other.

It's Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown, who is funny, articulate, a little zany and quite a character.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: And what we're going to see is this real back-and-forth over some of the issues we're seeing on the national stage, which is that this state is going bankrupt. They need to reform the way it works. And is it going to be substantive or is it going to just be nasty? I think it will be a little bit of both, but I can't wait to cover this one.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: I'll tell you what it -- I'll tell you -- I was just going to say, I will tell you what it's guaranteed to be, a whole lot of fun to cover.

YELLIN: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Now, let's stay in California.

Republican Carly Fiorina -- let's see that one, if we possibly can, Dee (ph) -- she had to move to the right to beat Tea Party-backed GOP candidate Chuck DeVore. Now, she will take on -- this is interesting as well, I think, Jessica, you will agree -- Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARLY FIORINA (R), FLORIDA SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: For three decades in Congress, Boxer has personified the entrenched, stale arrogance of someone who has long forgotten that, here in America, the people rule, not the government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: All right. Here we go.

Now, Jessica, can Fiorina successfully move back to the center and also bring in some of the Tea Party voters in the fall?

YELLIN: You know, Rick, no, I don't think she's going to even try to move that much to the center.

I think she's going to frame her campaign as an anti-Boxer campaign. Her whole message is just going to be that she thinks Barbara Boxer is wrong for the state, too many years there, too liberal, too much spending.

And she's going to try to -- because she's really embraced these positions. She's against abortion rights, for offshore drilling, positions that you really can't fudge once you have said them. And so it's going to be very mean about these two women really going after each other.

Barbara Boxer's numbers aren't strong in the state, but President Obama's are. And expect him to make a strong case for her here over and over here, Rick.

SANCHEZ: Jessica, you do a great job. Thanks so much for hustling out there and getting that story for us. We will just see what happens next.

MYERS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Joran van der Sloot confessed to killing a woman, and now we're learning new details -- you're not going to believe this, folks -- a sting operation where he was recorded by the FBI just before leaving for Peru.

You know, it's unfair to look at things in hindsight, but is it possible that the FBI could have stopped him, arrested him even perhaps, before he headed to Peru? Well, obviously they didn't know he was going to go down there and be accused of murder. But we are going to get into this sting operation. I'm going to tell you all about it. Also, our most intriguing person in the news, today, he testified on Capitol Hill about his device that he says cleans polluted water. Who is it? Next on the LIST.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: By the way, we just got this tweet in a little while ago. This is from BP officials.

Now, they say that the money that they make from the oil collected from the bottom of the Gulf, they're going to use that money to put into a fund to help save the Gulf again and actually bring it back environmentally and ecologically. So, this is what they want us to know right now.

"Total oil collected in the last four days, approximately 57,500 barrels. Began transferring the oil off of the collection vessel." And then they tell, if you want more information, you can go right there to their Web site. So, there you go. They're keeping abreast of -- keeping us abreast of just how much oil they're getting out of that place, and they say that, when they get it out, they're going to sell it and use the money to help fix up the Gulf of Mexico.

Time to check now the list of the most intriguing people in the news on this day. Here we go.

This guy's got ideas for clearing up the Gulf of Mexico. He's also got tons of money and now the attention of Congress, but you know him best from, "If you build it, they will come." Remember that?

We're taking you to Hollywood. Kevin Costner has put $26 million of his own cash into an oil-water separation machine he says cleans polluted water almost 100 percent of time.

Here's what he says about it: "I'm very sad about why this came to light -- came to the light of day, but this is why it was developed. And like anything that we all face as a group, we face it together."

Someone's taking him seriously. He's now testified today before the house committee on science and technology. There he is. Costner's got star power, money, and potential solutions, and he's ready to put his water-cleaning machine where his mouth is, to work. That is why on this day, we salute him as the most intriguing person in the news today.

There are some new high-def images, you've seen these, and we're learning more about them. It describes the oil leak in ways that we hadn't seen before. And maybe it answers some of the questions about just how much is down there and when they'll be able to stop it.

We're going to talk to Senator Bill Nelson. He thinks that we haven't been given the straight skinny by BP, and he's trying to hold them accountable. He's coming up.

Also, up to your "blank," in alligators. Well, speaking of alligators, what is going on here? That's next -- "Fotos." We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Hey, I got something for you. Are you ready? How would you like -- yes, I'm talking to you. How would you like to make $1,000? I'm serious. All you have to do is watch this video that I'm going to show you right here. You watch this video, you may be able to make $1,000. Are you ready? All right, here we go. Here's "Fotos."

All right, this is just plain strange. Take a look what happens here on this surveillance video from Spokane, Washington. That guy right there is stealing a doormat. Now, who in the hell steals a doormat, right? It's weird and kind of pathetic.

But how much do you think the owners are offering as a reward for that $20 doormat, is that? They're offering $1,000. Now, this has got to be some kind of doormat, right?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAYNE SAPP, ADVANCED METAL TECHNOLOGIES: It's really the principle. We feel there's value to us to really get down underneath and find out exactly if this is the person who we've had other issues in the past.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: So, they're willing to pay $1,000. Take a look at this guy, folks, you can make a quick grand. If you recognize this man, all you have to do is call the Spokane police.

Now, you say Ali Velshi playing with an alligator a little bit earlier. It turns out he wasn't the only one with an alligator. There were folks that got a scaly surprise as this visitor attended their school, this is in Tampa Bay, that's a middle school. Kids freaked out. They had to call this guy, who is really good at tying him up and doing all the things they do with the gators when they take him away.

Florida Fish and Wildlife, well, they're good at this. They trapped it and later on they had to put it down. And now someone's got a really cool belt.

Meanwhile, a man leads police on a high-speed chase in Texas. The suspect didn't give up. He plunged his car into the Rio Grande and then swam into Mexico and escaped. But the border patrol said, no, we're coming after you. They sent divers and even the Mexican military joined in the chase.

Why did the driver end up in such a fight? The answer came ten hours later, the vehicle was pulled out of the water and stacks of cash were found inside. Did you see that? Look at that. That's a lot of money and possibly a lot of other stuff.

You can see all of our "Fotos," by the way, by just going to my blog. It is at CNN.com/RickSanchez.

The president will once again allow drilling in the Gulf, but only in shallow waters. Now, how many jobs will that possibly save? We've made a commitment to you during this hour and the next that we will tell you what this story is doing to affect you directly. Well, this is one of those stories that does that.

Also, did the FBI to have a chance to nab Joran Van Der Sloot before he went to Peru? We have learned, here at CNN, that there's actually a tape that shows him in what was an extortion sting. That's the big trending story everyone's talking about today.

And guess what Brooke Baldwin does -- she follows trending stories for us. And nothing is a bigger trender than Joran Van Der Sloot. We'll be right back. This is your list, your national conversation, RICK'S LIST.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: This is crazy. We do trending stories every day with my colleague Brooke Baldwin. And folks at home, I want you to think about this if you would for a moment. The idea that just prior to Joran Van Der Sloot showing up in Peru and being accused of killing a woman that he was being recorded by the FBI secretly on tape taking money in what seemed to be an extortion plan.

And then you wonder, oh, if only they'd arrested him, and then -- well, I guess you can do this futuristic what-if thing forever. Let's not go there.

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What do you call it, Monday morning quarterbacking?

SANCHEZ: Backseat driving. This is fascinating. Give us the details.

BALDWIN: It adds another layer to a multilayered story. You said it. CNN has learned, yes, absolutely there's a videotape showing Joran Van Der Sloot counting $10,000 in cash in this meeting in Aruba in early May, so we're talking about a month ago here. Joran Van Der Sloot counted it we're not just told once but twice, according to a private investigator who we learned was involved in the investigation.

A federal law enforcement official has confirmed to CNN that the FBI paid Van Der Sloot a total of $25,000, all as part of this undercover investigation. The plot here was to extort money from Natalee Holloway's mother in exchange for information. What information would that be? Of course, the whereabouts of Natalee Holloway's body and also the circumstances surrounding her death.

And the source here familiar with this case, says, yes, indeed, the FBI and the U.S. attorney's office in Birmingham arranged for this undercover meeting in Aruba with Joran Van Der Sloot. And those details are also here in this 25-or-so page document here, all in Spanish, from Interpol. And according to this federal law enforcement source in this meeting an undercover FBI agent is the one that handed Van Der Sloot that $10,000 in cash, and then they wired another $15,000 to him to this personal bank account in the Netherlands.

Then the FBI, acting on the information that Van Der Sloot had provided them, went to this house to try to find Holloway's body. They didn't find it. They go back and looked at records and the records show that the house wasn't even built when Holloway disappeared. So, according to the Interpol documents, Mr. Van Der Sloot lied.

SANCHEZ: Wait a minute, wait a minute. This is fascinating.

BALDWIN: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Did he end up with some of the loot?

BALDWIN: We know for sure he had the $10,000 in cash and that $15,000 is floating out there in Aruba via wire transfer to the Netherlands.

SANCHEZ: Let me take it to the logical next step. Is it possible that the money he used to get to Peru, could have been -- not saying it was, but could have been some of the money?

BALDWIN: We don't know. It's an excellent, excellent, question. And a lot of people are saying to the FBI you provided the guy $10,000 to get to Colombia and get to Peru to start gambling and then meet Stephany Flores, but we cannot conclusively say that.

SANCHEZ: I understand. Look, there's going to be a lot of heat on the FBI, and I'm not sure that's necessarily fair, because just like we hold stories until the next day and the next day until we've got all our i's dotted and our t's crossed, the FBI may not have been ready to make the arrest yet.

BALDWIN: Right. And I talked to a lot of federal law enforcement sources, and they are very defensive, saying that the FBI wanted to hang in there a little bit longer hoping that they would get the much-needed and anticipated information. It's been hanging out there five years as to the location of Holloway's body.

SANCHEZ: And, look, to be fair, it's the Monday morning quarterback thing, but they didn't know that this guy was going to go down there and be alleged to have killed this woman.

BALDWIN: We don't know, but every day it's more and more.

SANCHEZ: What you've shared with us is fascinating. As intriguing as anything I've heard in a long time. Stay on it, Brooke.

BALDWIN: You got it.

BALDWIN: Listen to this. Watch this real quick. OK. There's SOT. I was thinking maybe there was sound on tape. But instead, I'm not sure what that is.

BALDWIN: Me neither.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Let's go on camera. Hey, it's live television, folks.

BALDWIN: We'll let you know.

SANCHEZ: Blanche Lincoln scores an upset in Arkansas. She's one of several women who swept the primaries. Your election update ahead on "The List."

Also, twitter feedback is next from you. Yes, we haven't forgot you.

Hey, you want to be on the show, by the way. There's the number you can call, and you can join us right here and hang out with Brooke. Me, well, not so important. The number is 1-877-thelist. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez. RNC chairman, Michael Steele questions how President Obama can talk to Iranian President Ahmadinejad but can't talk to BP's Tony Hayward. That's where we begin the "R&R" today, and here we go.

I know that it's Steele's job to go after the president, but does he have to -- does he have a case in going after him on this? Roland, you say what? Are you there?

ROLAND MARTIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I'm there, Rick. And I hear you.

SANCHEZ: How are you? Oh, sorry about that, man.

MARTIN: All good. All good.

SANCHEZ: This is interesting, this situation with the president of the United States being accused by Michael Steele in one case of not actually giving enough attention to Tony Hayward. I think part of the argument is, look, you know, this guy talks to Ahmadinejad, he should talk to Tony Hayward, the president of BP.

MARTIN: Well, first of all, I mean, remember, we're still talking about politics, Rick. That's what we're looking at here. And so you have Michael Steele clearly wanting to score a political point by pointing out that the president has not sat down with the CEO of BP, but also using the very same words that he used in a debate right here on CNN that he would, indeed, talk to those who we are against, if you will.

And so, this is politics, and so that's really point that Michael Steele is trying to make.

SANCHEZ: But beyond that, Roland, let me ask you a question. This president --

MARTIN: Sure.

SANCHEZ: -- is being criticized by many on the right, and some on the left, and this is interesting, because this has to do -- this has to do with persona, and personality.

Look, you've got as big a personality as anybody. You're the kind of guy that walks into a room and there's no question that everybody in the room knows that Roland has arrived, right? It doesn't seem to me like the president of the United States has that type of personality. He's more of a pseudo-intellectual or full-out intellectual.

He hasn't had the impact in the Gulf. He hasn't had that moment that maybe other presidents have had. Is it fair to hold that against him?

MARTIN: Well, first of all, keep in mind, this is not a situation where you can hold the federal government 100 percent responsible. It's not like the president can tell a general, tell the secretary of defense, tell one of his cabinet members, get this fixed. You're dealing with a government issue and a private company issue in terms of BP. That's part of the problem here.

SANCHEZ: But you -- no, wait a minute, that's a cop-out, man. We are not talking about what he can and can't do.

MARTIN: No, it's not. No, it's not. Rick, Rick, stop.

SANCHEZ: Go ahead.

MARTIN: Rick, it is not a cop-out. If I am not fully in control of something, then I cannot fully assume the situation.

So here's the case where the president is saying there's a leak going on. The federal government does not have the capacity to fix it. So, therefore, you're relying on someone else to get it done. You have to take care of your part.

Now, I think the point you're trying to make is we're looking for this moment where the president comes in, riding, you know, a horse saying I'm the guy that's going to get it fixed, but he can't get it fixed. He can't.

SANCHEZ: It has nothing to do with getting it fixed.

MARTIN: Yes, it does.

SANCHEZ: Let me finish. It has to do with perception. George Bush may not have known a darn thing about the Iraq war and Afghanistan, but on 9/11 when he sat there with the bull horn and he said, soon they're going to hear us too, and people applauded and cheered, that was the moment of leadership and it --

MARTIN: Rick -- SANCHEZ: Go ahead.

MARTIN: Rick, could the president of the United States, George W. Bush, send troops or planes or send bombs or drones? Yes. He could do that. Can this president order anyone in the federal government right now to fix the leak? No.

The reality is until you -- no, no, no.

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: I get your point and it's your perception. But, again, the problem that we have here is this is not a situation where you're fully in control. Yes, people are looking for that moment. But let's say the president comes out and he says --

SANCHEZ: Let's stop. My question is this -- we both agree, and you're right. He's done everything he can pragmatically and concretely, signed the right forms, had the right meetings, said the right things to the people who know what they need to be told.

Has he stepped up perception-wise before the American people and said, by, golly, I'm taking care of this, I promise, and come off with that sense of leadership. Is he capable of that?

MARTIN: First of all, there are two words here -- "implied" and "inferred." The president can say whatever he wants to say. He's said these things. Perception is not his decision. Perception is in the hands of people watching him and listening to him. So he can't dictate perception. All he can do is dictate his actions.

So people have to perceive these things. So for instance, you can create the perception that you are in control, but in reality, you do nothing. Or you can be focused on getting the problem fixed where the perception is you're not focused on it. So the question is --

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Wait a minute, let me ask you a question. I'm talking about perception in this conversation. Isn't your wife a preacher? Is your wife a preacher?

MARTIN: Yes, she is.

SANCHEZ: You and I have talked about this in the past. Isn't there a difference between a preacher who can affect people and a preacher who are says all the right stuff, knows the word, but somehow when people leave they say, for some reason I wasn't inspired. There's a difference, isn't there? And they're both good.

MARTIN: No, no, wait a minute. Let me show you something.

(LAUGHTER)

There's a difference between somebody who can preach the word -- wait a minute -- who can preach the word on Sunday and inspire you. But then there's somebody that can teach the word on Wednesday night bible night study and teach you.

(LAUGHTER)

The question is, do you want to be inspired or do you want to be taught? There are some people like my wife, like my pastor in Chicago and Houston, who can preach and teach. Some folks don't have that gift.

SANCHEZ: You're right and that was the point I was making earlier about capabilities. We'll leave it at that and we can get together and argue again.

MARTIN: But it's also perception. Perception is based on how you see it, not what they do.

SANCHEZ: Shoot me an e-mail and we'll continue the conversation during the commercial, OK? Roland, always good to join you for this "R&R" segment.

MARTIN: Thanks so much.

SANCHEZ: All right, take a look at this. Police released interview tapes from their investigation of football quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. We'll hear the alleged victim for the very first time. That's coming up.

Also, what you're saying -- enough about Sanchez and Roland -- what you are saying about BP. I'm going to share that with you. Stay there, we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: I promised you I would let you get in on the conversation. Lots of folks are talking about BP. They have paid a small percentage of liability claims since the oil spill.

Here's what you're saying. "They should shut down all BP gas stations and pay employees until the leak is fixed." Here's the next one -- "The oil spill has changed my vacation and voting plans." That's interesting, "changed my voting plans.: How many other people out there are now voting more to one side or the other as a result of what's going on there?

Poppy Harlow joins us next. She'll tell us about not just the politics of BP but the economics of BP. That's on your list next as the market gets ready to wind down for this Wednesday. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)