Return to Transcripts main page
Campbell Brown
President Obama Targets Immigration Reform; Alleged Russian Spies Appear in Court
Aired July 01, 2010 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAMPBELL BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Hi, everybody.
President Obama taking on a political hot potato tonight immigration. In what the White House is calling a major speech, the president charged that, for too long, Washington has put politics ahead of reform and called for bipartisan action on a clear national standard.
But is it all talk? Or is there an actual shot at immigration reform this year?
Also tonight, on day 73 of the disaster in the Gulf, we have got a report from the deck of the world's largest oil skimmer. It is the length of three-and-a-half football fields and 12 stories high. It isn't big enough to clean up a spill that has already dumped up to 139 million gallons of oil into the Gulf.
And then later: new developments in the case of the Russian spies who loved us. Federal prosecutors say one suspect now admits they caught him red-handed, and he is dropping the dime on his wife, too.
A lot to get to tonight, but we are going to begin with our number-one story, which is, of course, the immigration battle.
President Obama was front and center today calling for nationwide reform four weeks to the day before Arizona's tough new immigration law is set to take effect.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Laws like Arizona's put huge pressures on local law enforcement to enforce rules that ultimately are unenforceable.
These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound.
Our borders are just too vast for us to be able to solve the problem only with fences and border patrols. It won't work. Our borders will not be secure as long as our limited resources are devoted to not only stopping gangs and potential terrorists, but also the hundreds of thousands who attempt to cross each year simply to find work. (END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: In the most recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, 57 percent were in favor of Arizona's law.
The president's speech was wide-ranging, addressing everything from the importance of immigrants in American history to the frustration that many people feel with a system he called -- quote -- "fundamentally broken."
But he also outlined three specific goals for immigration reform, continuing to secure the border, holding businesses accountable for hiring only legal workers, and granting illegal immigrants citizenship only after they admit to breaking the law, pay their taxes, and fines, and agree to learn English.
Well, joining us now, two men at the forefront of the immigration issue and the debate, Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez, and former Arizona Congressman and current candidate for Senate J.D. Hayworth joining us as well.
Gentlemen, welcome to both of you.
Congressman Gutierrez, I know that you and members of the Hispanic Caucus met with the president this week to talk about this issue. Listening to him today, were you satisfied with what he said?
REP. LUIS GUTIERREZ (D), ILLINOIS: Yes, I think it was a good framework, making sure that we understand that the people who live along the border want to secure that border. We're sensitive to that issue. It is an important one to him, but also stressing the fact that simply -- like, I got here to Congress in '93, Campbell, and there were 5,000 Border Patrol agents. There are 20,000 today. We can put more Border Patrol agents. That in and of itself isn't going to settle the problem.
We have got to segregate those drug dealers and gang members who cross the border to do harm from those who are coming in search of work. And one of the ways to do that is to make sure that employers don't hire them and that there are still sanctions against them, and making an orderly process of our immigration, so we can supply the needs that we have.
That way, we can have internal security, security at our border. And I think that 1070 and the Arizona law is a loud clarion call to all of us to say let the federal government take responsibility over what is clearly, Campbell, a federal issue.
BROWN: All right, Mr. Hayworth, before I let you respond on this, let me play a little bit of what the president today said, because he did speak directly to Republicans in his remarks. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes. That is the political and mathematical reality.
The only way to reduce the risk that this effort will again falter because of politics is if members of both parties are willing to take responsibility for solving this problem once and for all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: So, Congressman Hayworth, if you are elected to the Senate this September, would a bill that tackles the three things that the president spoke about today get your vote? And explain why or why not?
J.D. HAYWORTH (R), ARIZONA SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: Well, first of all, Campbell, I should note a lot of unhappy people here in Arizona. The unhappiest Arizonan is John McCain, who was singled out by President Obama, and as the president waxed nostalgic for the amnesty bill that he and John McCain and Ted Kennedy sponsored a few years ago.
No, the fact is, I do not believe in amnesty.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: But, just want to be clear, Senator McCain changed his position.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: I know, but I just want to be clear for our audience, Senator McCain has taken a very different position from then today.
But go ahead.
HAYWORTH: Oh, yes. Yes, he has taken a very different position.
As his best friend, Lindsey Graham, said, Mr. McCain is taking a different position precisely because he has got a vigorous challenge in this primary, a primary I'm going to win because I am opposed to amnesty.
And what Mr. Obama offered today was simply a repackaged amnesty speech very similar to the speech that George W. Bush gave about a half-decade ago, the same talk, and the same -- the same false pathway to citizenship.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: I just want to be clear, because what he is saying is that these illegal immigrants would be granted citizenship again only after they admitted to breaking the law, that they paid any taxes, fines associated with that, and that they agree to learn English.
So, does that meet your criteria?
(CROSSTALK)
HAYWORTH: In other words, that's amnesty, Campbell. That's the Washington definition of amnesty.
And let me tell you, this is not a fine. This would be a bargain for people who have come here illegally. And the fact is, what the president is offering is just a re-branded form of amnesty that Washington has tried to stuff down our throat again and again.
What we need is the enforcement first act that is serious about enforcing our existing laws, that puts in place the necessary infrastructure on our border, in stark contrast today, when our commander in chief, very sadly, basically surrendered, saying we can't protect our borders. It was shameful and it is sorry, and I will tell you, this is the major disconnect between Washington and rest of the country.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: All right, let me go to Congressman Gutierrez on this, because I do want to ask you, the president today repeatedly attacked the law in Arizona.
But a lot of people in that state, a lot of people around the country, frankly -- I showed our poll numbers a few minutes ago -- believe that the White House doesn't get the extent of the problem that the folks there are facing.
And I do want to play this Web video from Arizona, a little snippet of it. Governor Jan Brewer had some pretty choice words for the president. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. JAN BREWER (R), ARIZONA: Washington says our border is as safe as it has ever been. Does this look safe to you? Washington is broken, Mr. President. Do your job. Secure our borders. Arizona and the nation are waiting.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: And, Congressman, I don't have to tell you this. The president's critics say he talks a good game on border security -- you just heard Congressman Hayworth -- but he's not willing to commit the resources.
You had several Republican senators asking him for 6,000 more troops on the border. He came back at them with 1,200. What -- what can he do to address those concerns that they raise?
GUTIERREZ: Yes, and I think that's what we are trying to do. And I think that's what the president began excellently to do today, quite honestly, Campbell.
OK, let's think about it, Campbell. When I got to Congress in '93, there were 5,000 Border Patrol agents. There are 20,000 today. We're spending billions of dollars more on fences on the border. We are putting more ICE agents on the border. The president said he's going to send 1,200. And there is $600 million today in the budget for more Border Patrol enforcement. But, Campbell, it just seems that not matter how much money and Border Patrol agents you throw at the problem, there are people who just keep saying no.
And what the president, I think, attempted to do today was to reach out to the 10, 11 Republicans, some of them, including John McCain and others, and Lindsey Graham, and former President Bush, who did a great job, and, say, can't we leave politics aside and really address the issue?
And, you know, Campbell, I think if we listen to the complete context of the president's speech, he did say there is a problem that we should listen to from the people of Arizona. But what he said, he doesn't think it is the solution. And he wants a holistic solution. And I think most American people agree with me.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: I am going to run out of time, because you are both politicians and you both filibuster just a little built.
GUTIERREZ: I'm sorry, Campbell.
BROWN: But, Congressman Hayworth, I do want you to respond to this, because he is making a fair point there. And the president did today. You can't ignore the numbers. There has been a massive increase in security on the border compared to how it was a few years ago.
HAYWORTH: Well, just understand what the president did in terms of National Guardsmen on the Gulf, 17,500. When it comes to our borders, some 1,500.
I believe you are going to have to put the standing military on our border and get serious. And instead of today declaring surrender, which is what the president did, we better start protecting our borders for our national security and for our economic security.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: Congressman Gutierrez, Congressman Hayworth, I really appreciate your time tonight, gentlemen. Thank you both.
GUTIERREZ: Thank you so much, Campbell.
HAYWORTH: Thank you.
BROWN: Coming up: The Whale, it is the world's largest oil skimmer. And, yes, that's what it is called. It spans more than three football fields, arrives in the Gulf just now. Has the massive oil spill finally met its match? We are going to take you inside the supertanker to see exactly what they're doing when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BROWN: A whale of a skimming vessel is now in the Gulf and waiting for approval to get to work. It is known as the A Whale, and it is believed to be the world's largest oil skimmer, sucking up at least 250 times as much as other vessels that are currently on cleanup duty right now.
Originally built as a cargo ship, this supertanker was only recently retooled to collect oil and is still frankly untested. But many are hoping that it could be the silver bullet in this battle to contain this massive spill.
Today, CNN's Ed Lavandera got a firsthand look. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This is how you get on the world's largest oil skimmer, quite a feat, and quite an adventure.
So, now we are on board a massive vessel called A Whale. And this is a giant cargo ship that has been retrofitted to skim oil out in the Gulf of Mexico. This kind of technology retrofitting never been done before. So right now, the Coast Guard hasn't given this ship permission to go out and skim oil in the Gulf of Mexico.
We are on the navigation deck of this vessel. And from this perch, you can really get a sense of the magnitude of this ship. It is almost four football fields long, one football field wide. And as you look at those other massive ships out there on the water, they look small from this vantage point.
But underneath this massive deck that you see right here below us, underneath there is where the crucial work will take place, if indeed the technology aboard this vessel does work. Underneath there is where the containers and where the oil could be skimmed into is being held right now.
So, we are going to go check that out. Those slits that you see on the side of the ship are called the jaws. And that is the critical component that has been retrofitted to help this ship collect oil.
So, the oil is going to come through here, into these valves and then into a series of five tanks. And that is the process of separating the oil from the water.
What you see here is the jaws. And essentially when this ship gets the clearance to go out and start skimming oil, the oil will come into here and then get brought into these valves and get processed, where they will begin the process of separating the water from the oil.
Right now, the crew of this ship is waiting on final permission from the Unified Command to start skimming oil in the Gulf of Mexico. There is a couple of issues that are being looked at right now. First of all, one of them is a safety issue. A ship this big out on the Gulf of Mexico needs about a half-mile radius all the way around to operate safely. So, they're trying to figure out if that is possible. There's also some environmental concerns. Part of the way this ship works is that it brings in oil and water. It separates that. And the water gets thrown back out into the Gulf of Mexico and they keep the oil. They are also looking as to -- into whether or not that water that is going to be discharged, what is the environmental impact of that?
So, that's one of the things slowing it down. But everyone aboard here thinks that it is just a matter of time before this vessel is put in to fight the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Ed Lavandera joining us right now from New Orleans.
And, Ed, what's next here? I mean, what is the latest on whether the Coast Guard is actually going to approve using this?
LAVANDERA: Well, the Coast Guard and the company that owns that ship have been going through a series of meeting. It was inspected late last week in Virginia.
And now the -- really, the issue is, is its size. Apparently, according to retired Admiral Thad Allen, he says that this ship would need to work very close to the actual wellhead site, which is already a very congested area with many, many ships working out there. And as you heard me mention earlier, this ship needs about a mile-wide radius to be able to maneuver and collect oil.
So, that sounds to me like one of the principal issues involved. The Coast Guard says it is hopeful that this could be a positive tool to use in fighting this oil disaster. But they haven't made the final decision just yet.
BROWN: All right, Ed Lavandera from New Orleans for us tonight -- Ed, thank you very much.
We are going to turn now to another untested tool that is being used in the cleanup, the toxic dispersant we talked about that is known as Corexit. A staggering 1.5 million gallons have been used to try to battle the spill, despite some very early concerns expressed by the EPA.
But now the agency says preliminary tests show the dispersant to be both effective and less toxic than similar products. Well, some outraged environmentalists argue the Gulf is no place to be experimenting with toxic chemicals, and they are still calling for an immediate ban.
Sylvia Earle is a former government scientist who has tackled spills like this before. And she's joining us now from London. And also joining us, Professor Don Van Nieuwenhuise, who is a geologist with more than two decades in the oil industry as well.
Welcome to both of you. Don, as it turns out, these initial tests at least show that the dispersant -- we mentioned Corexit that BP has been using -- may be one of the least toxic out there anyway. And I think BP originally told the EPA that they couldn't come up with a better alternative. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson didn't buy that at the time. And I first want to play for the viewers what she said back then. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LISA JACKSON, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ADMINISTRATOR: I wasn't satisfied with the answer that we got. The answer we got back from BP to me seemed more like a defense of their current choice.
We need to ask ourselves whether there is not a better product out there. And BP seemed to spend a lot of time saying why everything else didn't work. But they really didn't give me a feeling of comfort that they were asking honest questions. So we will do it ourselves.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: So, the EPA did do it themselves. And so far it does that this is good as any, I guess, to say the least. Is BP vindicated a little bit, given these tests, Don?
DONALD VAN NIEUWENHUISE, GEOLOGIST, UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON: Yes, I would say so. But you have to remember that these tests are short- term toxicity tests.
And as such, they're not looking at the long-term effects. And, of course, with the amount of oil and the amount of dispersant that we have out in the Gulf of Mexico, we have to be worried about long-term exposure and chronic exposure to the marine life that is out there.
And also these dispersants do sort of break up the oil and let it hang in the upper layer of the ocean. And it makes it a lit bit harder to skim. But one of the one of the decisions you have to make is if you have more oil on the surface than you can actually skim and collect, then you need to do something like use dispersants.
BROWN: So, let me go to Sylvia on this, because you guys are certainly the experts. BP and the administration, both pointed out today that the dispersed oil will degrade faster and that that is one of the positives here. It sounds like a plus to me.
But explain -- explain what that may mean.
SYLVIA EARLE, "NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC EXPLORER": That's the theory, that oil, when it is broken up into gazillions of small pieces, will be more available to microbes.
There are two things that really trouble me. One is that, basically, why would you want to disperse the oil, when -- except in very targeted areas? If there is a sensitive marsh or a rookery of some sort, then you make the tradeoff. Some things die that other things might live. Then you use dispersants perhaps in almost a surgical way to address a specific problem. But the broadcast use of these, especially to put it at the source, 5,000 feet underwater, not at the surface -- well, that is where some of it is going, but at -- right at the wellhead, to me is -- doesn't make sense. You want to concentrate the oil, so that you can collect it, rather than send it off into the water column and off into the system as a whole.
BROWN: So...
EARLE: One other thing, that the tests that have been done have been done, as far as I can tell, on one species of small fish and one kind of shrimp, and a (INAUDIBLE) shrimp. What about the creatures who live at 5,000 feet? What about the bacteria themselves? We don't really know.
BROWN: Right.
So, I want to follow up, though, on your first point, and, Don, because what BP would say to counter that is their goal its to break down the oil before it hits the shore. And I guess my question, is that really a worthwhile argument? What is your take on that? I mean, they say it generally it is less toxic than the oil. And the challenge here is obviously -- I mean, we would all look to do what Sylvia suggests, which is that they are able to get the oil before it reaches shore. But that is not necessarily the case. So, is that -- I mean, I know these are tradeoffs here. But does that make sense?
VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Well, yes, it does make sense, the way they're doing it, because if you wait until the oil even biodegrades a little bit, the dispersants are not very effective.
So, even the manufacturer will tell you that if you don't use it very soon after it comes to the surface or very soon after you can get contact with a dispersant, bacteria will start to degrade it. And the oil that actually is reaching the beaches is partially biodegraded already. And it would be hard to use dispersants on that without using the high-pressure and steam hoses they have used in Valdez.
And so you have to make a decision. Do you want a lot of oil on the beach? Or do you want a lot of oil in the ocean? Both are bad. There is nothing good about either one of the choices.
But if you cannot skim and collect and burn all that surface oil, you have to disperse it, so that you don't get so much of it on the beach, because that again is not just an ugly sight. It kills a lot marine life, and it also destroys a lot of tourist businesses and that sort of thing when it reaches the shoreline.
BROWN: Right.
Sylvia, and Don, I really appreciate your time tonight. Clearly, still a lot of questions we all have and a lot of questions that no one is able to answer just yet. Thank you for joining us. Really appreciate it.
VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Thank you. BROWN: Legendary singer Jimmy Buffett lending his voice to try to help boost the Gulf's battered economy. And tonight he is going to talk exclusively with Anderson Cooper about how exactly he is helping or trying to help save the coast.
Plus, a member of the alleged Russian spy ring confesses and drops the dime on his wife. We're going to have the details on that coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: He is one of the Gulf's most famous residents and now singer Jimmy Buffett is fighting to help his hometown survive the catastrophic oil spill. But his heart is not the only thing invested in this cause. Buffett just opened a new Margaritaville resort in Pensacola.
Anderson Cooper has an exclusive interview with the singer/songwriter tonight from his home state of Alabama. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIMMY BUFFETT, MUSICIAN: You are not human if anger isn't your first emotion, having grown up down here. But what are you going to do with it I think is the question?
ANDERSON COOPER, HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER 360": Who do you get angry at?
BUFFETT: You get angry at -- you get angry at people that -- I think people in the extraction business is the logical place for anger to go, because if they really had the -- if they really had the interest of the Gulf of Mexico and all of its entities at heart, they would have done a better job at the beginning.
And I think all the evidence in my humble opinion -- I am no expert on it -- kind of leads to the fact they didn't do that.
COOPER: You were saying this is the beach where you spent your misspent youth.
BUFFETT: Yes. Yes.
COOPER: What is it like seeing tar balls?
(CROSSTALK)
BUFFETT: It's depressing as hell, you know? Yes. I mean, it's -- my first thought is -- my scientist guys tell me it is the dispersants that are the problems.
I have got people that I deal with over in Mississippi and down in Florida say it is better for it to come on the beach. Then you can clean it up. But the dispersants, they -- nobody knows the long-range impact of that, what it's going to do to the food source and the bird life here. That -- that's the big question. And nobody has the answer to that. But seeing it on the beach, you just go, God, you know?
COOPER: Had you ever seen tar balls like this on the beach?
BUFFETT: Yes.
You know, it reminds me in the old days when tankers would come by and discharge their bilges. You would see this kind of stuff, but not to this degree.
COOPER: When you first heard about the disaster, did you think it would last this long?
BUFFETT: I knew -- you know what? I just thought -- you know, I have been in show business a long time. And I know liars when I hear them, you know? And that thing couldn't have blown up without -- I thought they were lying in the beginning. That was just me personally.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: So, when you heard -- when you heard 1,000 barrels?
BUFFETT: Total lie, that's what I thought.
COOPER: Yes.
BUFFETT: I thought -- it's like body counts in Iraq or anything else. Everybody is going to underestimate it.
COOPER: Can Margaritaville survive an oil slick?
BUFFETT: Sure.
(LAUGHTER)
BUFFETT: Hell, we have survive -- well, people on this coast can survive anything. It's another storm. It happens to be one we are not quite used to in terms of what it is leaving behind.
But this is hurricane country. And people bounce back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: Anderson Cooper with me now from New Orleans.
And, Anderson, Jimmy Buffett was going to have this big benefit concert that had to be canceled I know due to Hurricane Alex. Are they rescheduling that? What is going on?
COOPER: Yes, it's been rescheduled already. It's going to happen on July 11.
Kenny Chesney was going to perform with him. Kenny can't make it for the July 11 date, so he is still trying to figure out who else is going to be playing with him. But there are a lot of folks here are very excited about it. He actually ended up coming down to Gulf Shores anyway. Last night is when the concert was supposed to be. He ended up playing in front of a couple thousand people at his sister's restaurant, Lulu's, in Gulf Shores. So, he was still on stage, still singing, but it wasn't as quite as big a crowd as they will have on July 11.
BROWN: He's very unhappy with BP, as we heard. But a lot of people down there also blame the government, this administration for not reacting quickly, quickly enough. Does he think that the administration has some responsibility here as well?
COOPER: You know, I talked to him a little bit about that.
Certainly I think he's watching this. And there is plenty of blame to go around. He tries how to focus I think as much as possible on what he can do about it and what can be done, and not just kind of sitting around being angry, but how in both ways large and small, he can make an impact. He has donated boats to researchers in Mississippi, flat-bottom boats to enable them to go out and do research on the water.
He is having this concert. And he is trying to find and look for ways to kind of help, in very hands-on, hands-on ways.
BROWN: Anderson Cooper, tonight, joining us from New Orleans, Anderson, thanks.
And you can see more of Anderson's exclusive interview with Jimmy Buffett tonight on "A.C. 360" at 10:00 Eastern.
Straight ahead: A spy spills the beans and opens up about his year working for the Russians. We are going to have all the details coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Dramatic new developments tonight in the case of the Russian spies. Federal prosecutors say one of the suspects has admitted that yes, he is a spy. And yes, he did work for Russia. And in a surprising new twist, his wife also a suspect was just granted bail by the judge.
Deborah Feyerick is here with us with the very latest on all this. And, Deb, first of all, why did the judge grant bail to one of these guys? Do we know?
DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's what's so interesting. We're all sitting in court. We're not exactly sure what to expect. And then we find out that, in fact, one person is talking to prosecutors and his wife is walking out basically. She's going to be processed, but the judge basically said she did not appear to be a trained agent. And in fact, she didn't have the same kind of experience as the others seem to have.
She is a journalist. Vicky Pelaez. She basically works for a Spanish language newspaper. She was released on $250,000 bond. She's going to be under strict home confinement with an ankle bracelet. But they just felt she didn't meet the level the others did.
BROWN: OK. But her husband is the one who has confessed now to being a spy. And tell us what you learned from that confession?
FEYERICK: Well, prosecutors say that after he was arrested he did start speaking. His said his name really isn't Juan Lazaro. He said he grew up in the Soviet Union, non-Uruguay. And apparently he also said that, in fact, his loyalty to the Russian agency trumps even the love he has for his son. So he was the oldest of all of the alleged spies. He may have it more engrained in him perhaps.
BROWN: Wow. And I understand you also found out in court today that these guys -- that the accused may be part of a much larger ring, right? Of Russian spies?
FEYERICK: You know what's so interesting, and when the prosecutors were arguing against bail. One of the things they said is you can't let these guys out because first of all, they don't have to go very far. All they have to do is go up to the Russian consulate or the Russian mission to the United Nations.
BROWN: Right.
FEYERICK: But moreover, the prosecutor said that, in fact, these guys had access to a number of Russian government officials who they believe are part of this whole conspiracy. And that was kind of interesting. And I don't think that was accidental that they said that.
One interesting thing, they do said that their case is stronger now. And the reason for that, or actually the reason why the Soviet agents were here or the Russian agents I should say, excuse me. Finally we get an answer. They said that they were sent here for the security of Russia. And that's why they're in the United States. So that's the first kind of explanation that anybody has got.
BROWN: A great story to be following right now. Fascinating details coming out every day. Deb Feyerick for us on all this. Deb, thanks very much. Appreciate it.
Coming up, finally some good news to report about Jaycee Dugard. You remember her, she was the little girl kidnapped as a child, held captive for 18 years. Well, today, she is finally getting some compensation for her years of suffering. And we're going to have the details coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: In a few minutes, accident or murder? A city is on edge tonight as a verdict in the racially-charged case of a former police officer accused of shooting an unarmed man. But first, Joe Johns is here with a look at some of the other stories topping the news to night.
Hi, Joe. JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Campbell. President Obama throws down the gauntlet on immigration reform. In a major address today, the president called for bipartisan cooperation on one of the most divisive issues facing the country. Despite Obama's call for action on comprehensive immigration reform legislation, many lawmakers see virtually no chance Congress will even take up the matter before the November midterm elections.
An extraordinary prisoner swap may be in the works in the Mideast. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel may be willing to release a thousand Palestinian prisoners in exchange for one -- one man, an Israeli soldier. Netanyahu said today that Israel is ready to pay a high price for Gilad Shalit's release. The Israeli soldier was captured by Palestinian militant group's, Hamas, during a cross border raid four years ago.
The state of California is offering a multimillion dollar settlement in a nearly 20-year-old kidnapping case. Jaycee Dugard vanished when she was 11. She was found 18 years later in the backyard shack of a registered sex offender. He was on parole. Investigators say Phillip Garrido fathered two children with Dugard during her captivity. The California assembly passed a bill today giving Dugard $20 million to settle her claim against the state's Department of Corrections.
A recent survey by presidential scholars ranked Franklin Roosevelt as the number one commander-in-chief. President Obama enjoys a pretty strong approval rating himself. The latest Siena College poll ranks Barack Obama as the 15th best president even though he's only been in office a year and a half. Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, dropped to number 39, ranking him as one of the five worst presidents in that survey.
Whoo, that's -- those are tough numbers there for W.
BROWN: Yes, indeed. Joe Johns, tonight. Joe, thanks very much. Appreciate it.
Coming up, an explosive murder trial in California draws to a close. The racially charged case set off riots last year. Well, now a tense city is bracing for the verdict. That's just ahead.
And then, embedded in a war zone. You're going to hear from the man behind a powerful new documentary that takes us inside one of the most dangerous places on the planet.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: The story getting all the buzz tonight is one that is going to be pretty baffling to adults. What do you do when you combine a moving car, a daredevil teen, and a bridge? You get one really bad idea called car surfing. And of course, it's caught on tape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Kids, do not try this at home. I don't care if you're home, you're on vacation. I don't care where you are.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This daredevil balances on top of an SUV, traveling over Salmon Falls (ph) bridge. Seconds later, he adds this to this stunt.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's completely insane. That's totally illegal on several counts.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hit your head, and you're gone. Was it worth it? No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The penalty is up to $1,000 in fines and possible jail time.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You don't care because it's fun?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's fun. I know what I'm doing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: The brilliance of teenage boys. And a word to the wise -- car surfing is illegal for both the jumper and the driver.
Tonight, a dramatic trial, filled with racial tension is coming to a close out in California. And it has one city bracing for the worst right now. It's the explosive case of a white transit police officer accused of murdering an unarmed black man on a subway platform in Oakland. The shooting on New Year's Day in 2009 was captured on cell phone video and went viral on the Internet. The drama has not only unfolded in the courtroom but also on the streets of Oakland. CNN's Dan Simon reports tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This was Oakland, California in the days after January 1st, 2009. That's when a transit system police officer, who was white, fatally shot an unarmed African- American on a subway platform. It reignited long standing racial tension here. Rioters busted windows, set fires, and jumped on police cars.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We live a life of fear. And we want them to be afraid tonight. We want them to understand we will mobilize, we are a community and we are a voice.
SIMON: The case enraged so many because of this. Captured on cell phone video is a man lying face down with two police officers over him. A third stands up, pulls his gun and fires a shot heard on the video.
22-year-old Oscar Grant dead. Police had wanted to arrest him for fighting on a train. Tempers quelled when the district attorney charged the officer, Johannes Mehserle with murder. The trial had to be moved to Los Angeles because of extensive media coverage. Now, as it winds down, Oakland officials are bracing for renewed violence. That is if the jury acquits or finds Mehserle guilty of anything short of murder.
(on camera): Was it a murder or an accident?
OLIS SIMMONS, YOUTH UPRISING: You know, God and Mehserle know that. But I think everybody that sees it most people that see it, certainly people in Oakland and in communities of color around the world maybe that see it, see a murder.
SIMON (voice-over): Olis Simmons, an Oakland youth activist, says that is why she fears an explosion of violence if the jury comes back not guilty.
SIMMONS: I think Mehserle doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because his actions are so egregious.
SIMON (on camera): Mehserle tearfully testified that what happened here was nothing more than a tragic accident. That he meant to reach for his taser but instead pulled his handgun. But a fellow officer testified that Mehserle never mentioned that in the moments following the shooting. Prosecutors say it's more proof that what happened was no accident. This was a police officer who committed murder.
(voice-over): An expert for the defense claimed Mehserle had insufficient taser training which may have led to confusion on which weapon to grab. Also, people who witnessed the shooting testified that Mehserle looked shocked, backing up his argument that it was an accident. An all-white jury will decide if he goes to prison or walks.
SIMMONS: I think that there's a possibility that riots will happen.
SIMON: That's why Simmons' group is unleashing a series of public service announcements, pleading for calm either way.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Violence is not justice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIMON: Oakland police have launched what they call "operation verdict," a massive preparation to deal with any fallout.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We really have an obligation to the citizens and the businesses of this city to protect their property and to protect their safety.
SIMON: Cell phone videos, a riot and a trial. Now a city awaits the next chapter in a long saga of police and race relations.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Dan Simon joining me now from San Francisco. And, Dan, what are the jury's options other than a murder conviction here? SIMON: Well, Campbell, the jury has the option of manslaughter here, either voluntary or involuntary. But the prosecution, they want a second degree murder conviction here. And they say this is an officer who was really out of control, who lost control of the situation, pulled his gun, and meant to shoot and kill Oscar Grant. I can tell you that whatever happens here, though, Oakland is bracing for the worst. Just this afternoon, we saw a number of businesses already boarding up their windows -- Campbell.
BROWN: Dan Simon for us tonight. Dan, thank you.
Straight ahead, it is one of the most dangerous places on the planet. We're going to take a chilling look inside a hot zone in Afghanistan where our soldiers take enemy fire every day. Right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: You're about to get an inside look at one of the most dangerous and violent places for American troops right now. A powerful new documentary "Restrepo" tracks a year in the lives of soldiers in the U.S. Army platoon in Eastern Afghanistan. Just 15 men serve at that remote outpost. It's named after a medic who was killed in action. The film won the grand jury prize at the 2010 Sundance Film Festival. Earlier, I spoke to best-selling author Sebastian Junger who's also one of its directors. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Sebastian, welcome to you.
SEBASTIAN JUNGER, CO-DIRECTOR, "RESTREPO": Thank you.
BROWN: So, "Restrepo" is this outpost in the middle of nowhere and what you could probably argue is one of the most dangerous places on the planet right now. Describe what it is, what this place is?
JUNGER: It is a 15, 20-man outpost that was built by hand by these soldiers, Second Platoon, Battle Company of the 173rd Airborne. It's an hour and a half walk from the main base. They were in almost 500 firefights in their deployment. The first day I was up there we were attacked four times in one day. No running water. They didn't bathe for a month at a time. No Internet. No phone. No electricity at first. No cooked food. Hellishly hot in the summer swarming with flies. They couldn't communicate with home for a month at a time. It was basically they were on Mars. They had a rudimentary outpost. They were attacked 13 times that first day. And everything south of there was enemy territory. They were hit all the time.
It was very, very isolated. And the guys because of that, the guys did not have access to the wider world. All they had was each other. And interestingly, after they got back, after 500 firefights in their deployment, they got become to Italy where they're based. After a few weeks of sort of, you know, whooping it up, they wanted to go back to "Restrepo." And that was what I was trying to explain in my movie and in my book, like what is it about war that draws young men into it?
BROWN: To that point, the firefights from what they went through, I have a clip of one of them talking a little bit about that. Let's play it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Skydive, bungee jump. You know, kayak. But once you've been shot at you really can't come down. There's nothing. You can't top that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you going to go back to the civilian world then?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have no idea.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: This is about more, though, than the adrenaline, comparing it to bungee jumping or skydiving, being shot at. I mean, this is about these really intense bonds that formed between these guys that you capture in the film?
JUNGER: One soldier up there said, you know, Sebastian, there's guys in the platoon who straight up hate each other. But we would all die for each other. What was going on up there was brotherhood. Very different from friendship. Brotherhood, you don't even have to like the guy, but if he's your brother you'll protect him, you'll die for him. They all felt that way about each other. And for a 19 year old, a 20 year old, that arrangement is a very, very secure place to be emotionally or psychologically. They come back to society and all of a sudden they're just 19-year-old kids again, bottom of the food chain. They don't know what role they're supposed to play in society. They really don't know who they are. That is actually more insecure, more threatening than a place like "Restrepo."
BROWN: Let me before I ask you this, play another clip, which is I think something we rarely see, which is their reaction in that moment having lost a friend.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, my God.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's going to make it. It's all right. He's alive.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's going to make it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: It's hard to watch, I know.
JUNGER: Yes.
BROWN: But I think it's -- it's also hard to watch in a way because so much of our experience of seeing something like this is Hollywood's version of it. And you don't see people breaking down in tears ever.
JUNGER: They're people, they're kids. They're high school kids. I mean, imagine, a guy in high school, watching his best friend get hit by a bus, and crushed in front of his eyes and bleeding out. You know, like, that's the effect of watching your best friend get killed in combat. There is no difference at all. So these guys, you know, they -- in order to deal with their fear, they don't deal with their fear. They defer it.
BROWN: We do have the situation in this country right now, where thousands of these men and women are coming back, having gone through experiences like this. And we are so ill prepared to deal with it. We're not doing much to help them reintegrate into the real world, are we?
JUNGER: We're not. You know, it's a volunteer army. So only people that volunteer and their families understand that reality. And even the wives of these guys don't understand it really.
I mean, I've got e-mails from many of the wives saying, you know, watching your movie or reading your book was really helpful. If I had read your book before the divorce, we would not have gotten divorced. Because understanding what their men went through became crucial for some of these women in accepting the results of it which were incredibly painful.
BROWN: This is not a political movie. The book, it's not a political book. You're not taking sides here in any way. This is about the experience of war which I think is important to note. But you were there a lot over this year-long period. What was your take? I mean, do you think we're making progress?
JUNGER: Right now, this is the lowest level of violence in that country in 30 years. No one realizes that. Sixteen thousand Afghan civilians have died because of NATO combat operations in Afghanistan since 2001. A horrifying number, but it pales in comparison to the civilian deaths in the '90s. Four hundred thousand Afghan civilians died in the '90s. So by that metric, we are making progress. The question is, does the world have the staying power to actually see this through?
BROWN: Let me ask you this question because I saw the movie on a Saturday night. I woke up the next morning. And "The New York Times" had this photograph on the front page of a serviceman saying goodbye, crying, as he held his 6-month-old baby. This is happening constantly in this country. And yet, it does fall off of our radar screen. Watching these guys, do they feel like that people have forgotten them?
JUNGER: One very cold winter night out there at "Restrepo" at this remote outpost, one of the guys said to me, "hey, Sebastian, let me ask you a question? Does anyone even know we're out here?" And I said, I mean, I said, yes, they know you're in Afghanistan, of course. But do they know you're at a 15-man outpost on a hilltop in zero- degree weather getting attacked five times a day? You haven't had a shower in a month? No. They don't know that. They're fighting incredibly hard out there. And that reality, Americans do not quite understand what that reality means.
BROWN: It is an amazing film, really haunting, beautifully done, but also fascinating to watch. And worth everyone's time and the book as well. It's really nice to have you here. Appreciate it.
JUNGER: Thank you very much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: And the film "Restrepo" is playing in select cities right now.
"LARRY KING LIVE" starts in just a few minutes. But up next, tonight's "Punch Line." Everyone is in a holiday mood.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Now it's time for tonight's "Punch Line," the best of late night in under 60 seconds. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hurricane Alex has rendered their oil containment plans useless. In other words, nothing has changed.
JIMMY KIMMEL, HOST, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE": For the first time since the tournament began on June 11th, there was no World Cup action today, which turned out to be not much different from when there is World Cup action.
STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, "THE COLBERT REPORT": These spies were deep undercover on a mission from Moscow to develop ties in policymaking circles. Apparently, they wanted to know our government's policies, but C-SPAN was too boring.
DAVID LETTERMAN, HOST, "LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN": They're having the confirmation hearings down in Washington, D.C. with Elena Kagan, and so far the woman has offered very few opinions. I thought to myself, well, my God, how do you find a woman like that?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: That's it for us. "LARRY KING LIVE" starts right now.
