Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
BP Replaces CEO; New Leaked Documents Highlight Difficulties In Prosecuting War In Afghanistan; Massive Military Leak: Info on Thousands of Firefights & Attacks; BP's $17 Billion Loss; Illegal Immigrants Trapped in the U.S.; Mad as Hell in Bell; America Divided on Immigration; Football Helmet Safety
Aired July 27, 2010 - 07:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Good Tuesday morning to you. Thanks so much for joining us on the Most News in the Morning. It's the 27th of July. I'm John Roberts.
KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Kiran Chetry. We begin with the developing story this morning.
BP's CEO, Tony Hayward, is out and headed to Siberia. The company officially firing him from his position overnight, and American, Bob Dudley, will take his place. We're going to be live at BP headquarters with more reaction from London, just ahead.
ROBERTS: Also overnight, BP announced a second quarter loss of more than $17 billion. BP shares have plunged nearly 40 percent since the spill, but they have recovered somewhat in recent days. How will the markets react to this news? We're covering that angle for you as well.
CHETRY: And it's the largest leak of secret war time intelligence ever. Senate committee is now calling for an investigation saying that national security is at risk, but who's behind the leak and will it change the political or military course of the war in Afghanistan? We're live at the Pentagon with that.
ROBERTS: But first, BP's CEO, the man who said he wanted his life back after an explosion killed 11 of his employees, just got his wish. Tony Hayward is out. He got the boot five hours ago, though he's not stepping down until the first of October.
He'll leave with a year's salary in his pocket. That's $1.6 million. And it looks like Hayward will stay with BP for now, heading up a new oil and gas venture in Russia.
Also overnight, BP's second quarter earnings were announced, a bruising $17 billion loss. We're covering all the new developments for you. Jim Boulden is live at BP headquarters in London. Carter Evans is covering the money angle here in New York City. We begin with Jim in London. Can a change at the top, Jim, turn the company's tainted image around?
JIM BOULDEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, certainly BP hopes so. They hope by putting Bob Dudley, this American who was born in -- raised in Mississippi, can change the face of BP, especially in the U.S. which is such a crucial market for this global energy company.
Obviously Tony Hayward was zeroed in on by many people in the U.S. as a problem so clearly he had to go. He'll have a transition period helping Bob Dudley. He will keep his year's salary and pension. He's been at BP for 28 years.
But what Bob Dudley needs to do, they say he'll sell $30 billion worth of assets, so it will change this company. But what he needs to do is change the culture, because Tony Hayward promised that it would be a much safer company than what his predecessor had left him. Clearly that wasn't the case.
ROBERTS: Appointing an American, Jim to head up this company, is this an indication by this British-run company that America is a very, very important market for them?
BOULDEN: Yes, absolutely. I mean BP took over Arco, took over Amaco, has huge exposure in the Gulf of Mexico. It's also of course in Alaska, and it's one of the top gasoline distributors in the U.S.
And Bob Dudley will be seeing -- even though he'll be based here at BP headquarters in London and there will be another person put in charge of the U.S. operations, he will be seen now as the face, and he will be more modern CEO, some people say, that Tony Hayward just wasn't that kind of CEO that a company this day and age needs and they hope Bob Dudley who has been at BP a very long time will be that kind of CEO.
ROBERTS: Jim Boulden for us in London this morning. Jim, thanks so much.
Protesters from the group Greenpeace claimed that they have shut down every BP station in London this morning. The oil giant confirms that 10 to 15 of its stations have been idled by demonstrators, who showed up with signs reading "closed" "moving beyond petroleum" before tripping safety switches and cutting off power at the pumps. Greenpeace claims that it immobilized 50 service stations.
CHETRY: Also new developments this morning and major fallout over the leaking of classified documents from the war in Afghanistan to whistle-blower Web site WikiLeaks.org.
The "Wall Street Journal" is now reporting that the Pentagon is going after the hard drive belonging to army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning. Manning is already charged with leaking other classified information. Barbara Starr is live for us at the Pentagon this morning. Tell us more about this investigation into this private.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, good morning. Where it all starts at the Pentagon right now though is they are looking at all of these documents. The most urgent issue for them is to understand what is in these 90,000 documents that are generally secret, classified, what risk it may pose to troops in the field or to ongoing military operations by having this information out there in the public arena. Of course, they are looking at private 1st class Bradley Manning, a 22-year-old army intelligence analyst who was serving in Iraq, who already is charged with disclosing classified video about operations in Iraq and having tens of thousands of documents in his possession. Obviously he's suspect number one. Kiran?
CHETRY: And we already said that he's charged with leaking information. It was the video that surfaced, right, of an attack that left two journalists and some civilians killed in Iraq.
STARR: Absolutely right. A few months back WikiLeaks posted a video of this 2007 helicopter attack in Baghdad. It was a classified video. It did show, by all accounts, the potential that some civilians were killed in this video that you now see.
It became very controversial and the question was, who had the video and how did they get it out? And that fundamentally now goes to the question on the table, the question for investigators -- did Bradley Manning act alone and get his hands on tens of thousands of documents? How could that possibly happen? What national security risk is there? What is wrong with the system that one single private first class, a very low-level army soldier, could get his hands on so much classified material. Kiran?
CHETRY: Right. And you're looking at 92,000 different documents, and the question is, how could so much information leave without tipping off anybody.
STARR: How could it happen? Did a private 1st class, a 22-year- old intelligence analyst, as savvy as he may have been on computers, really act alone? You know, we talk a lot about cyber attacks in the business world, in industry, in the military, in government. This may have been the ultimate cyber attack, and it came from within. Kiran?
CHETRY: We'll continue to follow it this morning and talk more about the fallout as well. Barbara, thank you.
In less than five minutes in fact we'll speak to author Philip Smucker. He's been on the ground along the Afghan-Pakistan border. He'll talk more about the allegations that Pakistan secret intelligence service was aiding some of our enemies in Afghanistan. We'll talk more about the fallout there coming up.
(WEATHER BREAK)
CHETRY: It's nearly eight minutes past the hour. So much talk about illegal immigration, how to stop people from sneaking across our borders. But what happens when illegal immigrants actually want to go back to their own countries but can't? CNN's Soledad O'Brien joins us with a special report still ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning.
It's being called a massive military breach. In all, more than 90,000 documents obtained and then released by Web site WikiLeaks.org. It's the most in-depth look at the day-to-day fighting in Afghanistan containing names, locations, weapons, logistics, and concerns about whether Pakistan is a true ally.
There has been so much talk about who was behind the leaking, but right now we're going to break down more of the substance inside of these documents.
Joining us from Washington, Philip Smucker, an independent journalist. More recently he's been reporting along the Afghanistan- Pakistan border for his documentary book titled "My Brother, My Enemy." Philip, it's good to speak to you this morning.
SMUCKER: Thank you, Kiran.
CHETRY: Let's break down the ISI, the Pakistan spy agency. There is some suggestive evidence, people who have analyzed this say not necessarily a smoking gun, but some evidence that they are actually helping the Taliban and insurgency. Pakistan of course an ally. We give more than $1 billion a year. We've given tens of billions of dollars to this country as we've been fighting this war. How significant are these allegations contained within some of these documents?
PHILIP SMUCKER, INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST AND FILMMAKER: Well, think there is a preponderance of evidence to suggest some degree of complicity. There's a name comes up over and over again, and it suggests that things haven't really changed that much, even since 2001 when I covered bin Laden's get-away at Tora Bora.
One particular character, Hamid Goul, the head of ISI during the war against the Soviet aggression, is now back in action, according to some of these files, and meeting with senior Al Qaeda leaders on the border. That's very disturbing.
CHETRY: We have a reporter Atia Abawi in Kabul. We spoke to her this morning. She says the Afghan government is almost trumpeting this, saying we've been saying this all along, that Pakistan is working against us when it comes to helping terror.
What type of impact, if any, will it have on the war we're fighting and our relationship with the Afghan government?
SMUCKER: Well, I've seen their press releases as well, and they're really saying what they've been saying, the intelligence officers -- my former interpreter who is now a governor in one of these eastern provinces has been saying this all along.
If you go to the border, you can go up on the Pakistani side and you'll sit with the troops and watch the jihadis go in to kill Americans. So whether or not there are meetings behind the scenes, the Pakistanis have still not come up to the border and begun to help us. And you can never win a counterinsurgency as long as there is that kind of a sanctuary. We know that. We can go back to Vietnam and we can see that. CHETRY: So what -- I guess you're saying it's sort of common knowledge, a lot of people in Afghanistan are saying it is common knowledge. What is the disclosure of these documents do, though, in terms of political pressure on Pakistan or our government to make a change here?
SMUCKER: Well, I think it's more a matter of how it's described to the American public. This is going to be a battle of ideas here in the United States, as across the Islamic world and in Afghanistan- Pakistan.
The commander in chief needs to get out in front now and stop letting people in South Asia spin the war. It is a very important, crucial time. He has implemented his new strategy, and it is important to note that these documents do not really cover the beginning of Obama's new strategy. So let's see how he handles it. I think that he really needs to come out and address these concerns.
CHETRY: Right. You're talking about the dates of these documents prior to the upping of troops and the counterinsurgency strategy that's working now. But you've been there, you're on the ground. Has that much really changed? Have we not made that big of a dent with this counterinsurgency?
SMUCKER: Well, which I think that the counterinsurgency is certainly making headway, and in some areas it is going better than in other areas.
But we're seeing the same problems that have been recurring for the last eight years, and in some cases, they're getting worse.
Up in Chitral, the jihadists are moving in. They're taking over towns. In Nuristan, you can go up and down the border and you can look at certain pockets that are not doing well at all. And I think that it's a matter of explaining, I think as General Petraeus has already done, that this is going to probably be the bloodiest summer on record.
CHETRY: The White House is condemning the leak, as is the Pentagon, of course, saying that it can put the lives of Americans at risk by having some of this information out there. Yet at the same time, there seems to be a downplaying as well, saying that a lot of this documentation doesn't have any huge new revelations in it. But what about the concerns, the compromising of our national security with these documents being out there?
SMUCKER: Well, there's no doubt this is a massive compromising of American intelligence. In fact, it should be -- and I'm sure it is -- an embarrassment to the Pentagon. You cannot release this volume of field reports. These are essentially field reports by middling to high-ranking American officers about intelligence they're gathering, even on Al Qaeda who is our, you know, obvious foe there. And so the releasing of this evidence not only plays into the hands of the enemy, but it also can bear upon the American public's support for the war.
CHETRY: Right, which as we know has continued to drop as the conflict has gone on over these years. Philip Smucker, independent journalist, filmmaker, author of "My Brother, My Enemy," thanks for joining us this morning.
SMUCKER: Thank you, Kiran.
ROBERTS: Well, still ahead on the Most News in the Morning, angry protests in a small California town over city officials' huge salaries. You will not believe how much money they were paying themselves while holding out on everyone else. That story just ahead.
Seventeen minutes after the hour.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Our council is not representing our best interest.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Twenty minutes after the hour now. BP reporting record losses in the past three months. CNN's Carter Evans is here this morning "Minding Your Business." Tough blow to them but probably one they can weather.
CARTER EVANS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, certainly can weather it. So let's break this all down. The $17.2 billion loss but that is not all that BP is spending on this clean-up spill. We kind of got it broken down for you.
The total cost -- and it took this charge this quarter is $32 billion. You see, it's got $7 billion in the bank right now but it took a charge of $32 billion. And basically that includes the $20 billion fund that it already set up. It includes the $2.9 billion that it's already spent on the clean-up but there's a big disconnect there. There's about a $9 billion difference. And what BP is doing is it's setting aside money for future costs in advance right now so it can get back to making a profit.
We've also got the stock graph for you. I'll show you that real quick. It shows you how far BP's stock has come down in just the last few months. It started out at the top on the left there around $60 a share. Down at the end of June where you see where it bottoms out in that "v" there. It was around $27 a share. You see in just the last couple of weeks that it's come back up. And in fact yesterday, the stock rose about five percent on word that Hayward was leaving. So that shows you what investors think about the current CEO.
CHETRY: Yes. So he's out, they're bringing in Bob Dudley and they also have the news at least that oil is not gushing into the gulf anymore. The cap was successful. Now it's not a permanent kill but at least we don't have that live picture every day of all of that oil flowing into the gulf.
EVANS: Right. So,the PR picture for BP is getting a little better but, you know, this is not going to be the end of it. They're going to be cleaning up this for a very long time and there could also be some fines here for violating the Clean Water Act. That hasn't been accounted for yet. Those could be up to $18 billion just alone. So they're looking at spending a lot more money. Plus all the lawsuits that could come out of this for years.
ROBERTS: But basically today, earnings report, they're trying to get a lot of stuff off the table.
EVANS: Trying to get it all off the table. Last year about this time, BP made about $4 billion so a $17.2 billion loss. It is a huge loss. But imagine this, you know, this is a catastrophic spill and the company managed to pay for this in just one quarter.
ROBERTS: Yes. And if the price of gasoline goes up when the economy starts to roar back, they'll be making money hand over fist.
EVANS: Absolutely.
ROBERTS: Don't cry for me, Argentina. Thanks, Carter, good to see you this morning.
CHETRY: Well, fierce immigration debate raging across the nation. Some immigrant families say they just want to go back home. The problem is many of them don't have the money to do it and the government's not stepping in to help either. Soledad O'Brien's special report coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Twenty-four minutes past the hour. In about 48 hours, Arizona's controversial immigration law goes into effect. This morning, there's a new CNN/Research Corporation poll that shows Americans are divided over immigration reform. And they're divided by race.
Seventy percent of Hispanics think the main focus of immigration reform should be a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Just over half of African-Americans agree with that. While white Americans, that number is only 36 percent. Then, the numbers are basically reversed when we ask should the main focus of reform be to deport illegal immigrants. African-Americans again pretty much divided on the issue. Only 27 percent of Hispanics said yes, while 63 percent of whites said yes.
And with unemployment hovering near 10 percent nationwide, there are plenty of immigrants, both legal and illegal, among the millions having trouble finding work.
ROBERTS: So many are trying to return to their native countries to search for jobs but sometimes going back home can be easier said than done. For more on that, we're joined by our Soledad O'Brien, special correspondent for CNN's "In America" documentary series.
Good morning. What did you find out? SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you. Yes, you know, one of the things I think you hear a lot is why don't illegal immigrants just go home. And actually, it turns out that it's far more complicated than just that, to go from the United States back to their home countries.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
O'BRIEN (voice-over): Edwin Andrade first came to the U.S. from Ecuador because his daughter Dominica (ph) was dying. Her heart ailment could only be treated here. When their visas ran out, his family stayed, illegally.
EDWIN ANDRADE, TRYING TO RETURN TO COUNTRY: I make decision to stay here. I left everything for coming here to save her life.
O'BRIEN: Even after Dominica got better, the Andrades continued to stay. They had good jobs. They had a second daughter with U.S. citizenship.
(on camera): You want to go home.
ANDRADE: I got to go back home. In my country, I'm a citizen. I got to go whatever I need to go. I have -- I'm afraid.
O'BRIEN (voice-over): After 13 years, the Andrades are doing the unthinkable -- trying to leave. But they say they feel trapped, unable to find work in a recession. They're part of an estimated half a million illegal immigrants who are struggling to go back home.
(on camera): Are you stuck?
ANDRADE: Yes. I'm stuck. I don't have -- I don't have hands. They have like a tie my hands.
O'BRIEN (voice-over): If Andrade tries to fly out using his Ecuadorian passport, officials will discover he's overstayed his visa. He'll face potential fines and expulsion from the U.S. for years. Leaving isn't so easy.
PABLO CALLE, ECUADOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL: We have a case of an Ecuadorian that when us and they said listen. I have nothing left in this country. I have no money for my air ticket. I just want to go back to the country. and they tell him no.
O'BRIEN (on camera): Are you saying that some people say I'd love to go home but I can't?
CALLE: Yes, that's their reality.
O'BRIEN (voice-over): Some illegal immigrants even face detention if they try to leave.
JOHN DE LEON, MIAMI IMMIGRATION LAWYER: If you want to stay, they get you out very quick. If you want to leave, they try to make it hard for you to leave. O'BRIEN: Immigration authorities declined to be interviewed on camera. They say people facing deportation orders may be detained while they're processed. The only way to come and go without a penalty, sneak back across the border.
At a center for day laborers in Los Angeles, undocumented immigrants can't fathom paying a "coyote" (ph) thousands of dollars to go backwards in their American dream.
He says, "I've been wanting to go for a long time but I make the decision and I don't even have enough money for a ticket."
And if they aren't Mexican citizens, it's more complicated. For example, Guatemalans face arrest if they enter Mexico illegally. Guatemala is one of the countries that helps its citizen get back home giving two people each week a bus ticket and negotiating safe passage.
PABLO GARCIA SAENZ, GUATEMALA CONSUL GENERAL IN LOS ANGELES: This year, 50 people is take ticket for return to Guatemala.
O'BRIEN: Edwin Andrade says the immigration crackdown has made it hard for him to get any work. But once he raises the money, he's taking his family back to Ecuador.
ANDRADE: I say thank you very much for the opportunities what I have in this 13 years in United States. I want to see my country again. I want to start at zero again.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
O'BRIEN: Starting at zero again, he says. Well, obviously, Mexican citizens who just go back across the border if they have their Mexican passport. But if you're from Guatemala or Honduras, you can actually be arrested if you're going through Mexico illegally trying to make your way back home. And ICE, the immigration and customs officials say there are other options as well for people who are in the country illegally, turn themselves in, go before a judge. But there can be penalties for that. And also they could take basically their chances, show up at the airport and deal with immigration there. But that's sort of touch and go. They do it case by case is how it's decided.
ROBERTS: Yes.
O'BRIEN: So it's very ironic, isn't it? The idea that --
CHETRY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: You would think that it would be for people who want to leave --
CHETRY: Right.
O'BRIEN: -- it would be an easier process to get out of the country. ROBERTS: As you say, if they want to stay, they want them to go. But if they want to go, then they say, oh, no, you got to stay for a little while.
O'BRIEN: It's more complicated than it should be.
CHETRY: Also, you think it would actually be cheaper, you know, more prudent for the United States rather than detaining people for months on end as well to send them back.
O'BRIEN: It's interesting. And you think about the cost.
CHETRY: Right.
O'BRIEN: You know, Guatemala's giving out a bus ticket a week.
ROBERTS: Yes.
O'BRIEN: One bus ticket a week.
ROBERTS: Well, how much does it -- how much -- we're chasing down felons and deporting 400,000 undocumented immigrants every year --
(CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: The math never adds up. I don't know the numbers but the math never adds up. And I think a lot of it is just bureaucracy around the process. People feel very trapped.
ROBERTS: Well, speaking of math, we'll have a chance to ask that of an immigration official in about 10 minutes' time. We're going to talk more about the immigration debate with John Morton. He is the director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency better known as I.C.E..
Soledad, thanks so much for that.
O'BRIEN: You bet.
ROBERTS: All right. It brings us to the half hour now. Time for this morning's top stories. Big changes at the top for BP's CEO Tony Hayward. He's out. American Bob Dudley is in. The oil giant taking another hit this morning. Second quarter earnings show the company suffered about a $17 billion loss.
CHETRY: There is new tragic developments on the ground in Afghanistan. NATO confirming it has found the body of one missing American sailor. The massive search continues for another. A Taliban spokesman said one of the Americans had been killed in an ambush and the other one captured.
ROBERTS: And the Pentagon reportedly going after an Army intelligence analyst's hard drive as it tries to find out who leaked 90,000 secret reports from the war in Afghanistan. Bradley Manning is already charged with leaking classified information that put the web site WikiLeaks on the map. There is a suspicion that maybe he leaked some more.
CHETRY: Well, there's outrage in Bell, California. This is a city outside of Los Angeles. If you don't know the story, officials in this blue-collar town were paying themselves insanely large salaries. And as Ted Rowlands tells us, the city council is now slashing their own pay and the mayor is finishing his term for free.
TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: John and Kiran, the outrage continues here in the city of Bell, just outside Los Angeles. People just cannot believe that their city leaders were paying themselves so much money while everybody else was going without.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ROWLANDS (voice-over): Looking for answers and for heads, hundreds of furious taxpayers showed up at a Bell City council meeting last night.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please, I need respect for everybody. Please.
ROWLANDS: Respect for government is hard to find in this city with the median income of less than $40,000 because over the past few years, unbeknownst to seemingly everyone, while city leaders have been slashing budgets, they were paying themselves ridiculous salaries, including a jaw-dropping $787,000 a year to city manager Robert Rizzo.
That's almost double of what President Obama makes. Rizzo, thanks presumably to taxpayers, owns this horse ranch in Washington state and this beach home in southern California. Then there's the police chief, Randy Adams, making $457,000 a year.
OFC. GILBERT JARA, BELL, CALIFORNIA POLICE DEPT.: We're all upset.
ROWLANDS: Showing us a squad car with 116,000 miles on it, Officer Gilbert Jara says for years while the chief and city manager have been lining their pockets, the police budget has been shrinking. Jara, who is the president of the Police Officers Association says he and the other 18 members of the department have gone without a pay raise for three years.
JARA: They tell us there is no money but then again, they're earning 800 grand a year and our chief is earning $450,000. So that's a lot.
ROWLANDS: The assistant manager is also making a lot. $376,000. And some members of the city council who only work part-time have been pulling in about $100,000.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Shame on you! Shame on you!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're disrespectful. You're a piece of (bleep). ROWLANDS: As angry as they are now, voters here agreed to make Bell a charter city in 2005 which gave officials the legal right to basically pay themselves whatever they wanted. Attorney general Jerry Brown has launched an investigation.
JERRY BROWN, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL: My office puts people in jail for taking $10,000 or $20,000. Much less $50,000. Here we're talking hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars, maybe millions, when you add it up over a number of years.
ROWLANDS: In the past week, Rizzo, his assistant and Chief Adams resigned. Last night, the mayor announced he'll finish his term without pay and won't seek re-election. And members of the city council say they'll take a pay cut. But, unless something changes, Robert Rizzo's pension will be more than $600,000 a year. Adams will make more than $400,000.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROWLANDS: We tried to get a hold of Chief Adams and Robert Rizzo but didn't have any luck. People here say neither one of them have been seen anywhere in town since their salaries were made public. John, Kiran.
ROBERTS: Ted Rowlands for us this morning. Wow, what an amazing story. But as I said, charter city, they can pay themselves what at the want. Nobody was looking.
CHETRY: There you go. Now they are.
ROBERTS: Yes, definitely looking.
CHETRY: Fired up.
ROBERTS: When your kids take to the football field this fall for that first big game, are the helmets they're wearing really keeping them safe? Got some answers this morning from a brain injury expert who advises the NFL. It's an interview that every parent who's got a child that plays football should see. Just ahead. It's 35 minutes after the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ROBERTS: Twenty-two minutes now to the top of the hour.
Under the Obama White House, deportations are up. A new "Washington Post" report says the number will top 400,000 this fiscal year. The president has called for Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform but the nation is divided on exactly what that reform should do. A brand-new CNN Research Corporation poll shows a majority of Americans, 57 percent, think that reform should focus on deportation.
42 percent say reform should focus on a path to citizenship. For more on all of these, I'm joined by John Morton. He is the director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, better known as I.C.E..
John, good to see you this morning. Thanks for joining us.
JOHN MORTON, DIRECTOR, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT AGENCY: Good morning, John. How are you?
ROBERTS: Good. I don't know if you got a chance to see Soledad O'Brien's report just a few minutes ago but she profiled this fellow from Guatemala who's been in this country undocumented for a number of years, says he'd like to go back but there is a lot of bureaucratic red tape to try to get back to Guatemala.
And his case is somewhat emblematic of 500,000 other people in this country who would like to go home but say that, you know, fines if they come forward they might face fines or they might be forced to stay here for a while. In a case like that, why doesn't I.C.E. make it very easy for these people to go back home?
MORTON: Well, I think a lot of those concerns are exaggerated or misplaced. We handle every case that we receive on a case by case basis and we frequently assist people to get home quickly. The bigger question is whether or not the government should pay for air tickets and things like that for individuals to go home and I don't think that's the answer.
ROBERTS: Right. I'm sorry, the fellow was from Ecuador, not Guatemala. But when you look at the amount of money that's spent rounding up people, deporting them, would a plane ticket be cheaper?
MORTON: Well, I don't think that we should saddle the taxpayer with the cost of people who want to go home voluntarily. If you want to go home voluntarily, go down to the local consulate and get your passport in order and go home.
ROBERTS: All right. On this issue of the number of deportations, 400,000 expected this year under the Obama administration, much higher than during the Bush administration in its last two years, what's responsible for that increase?
MORTON: Well, we've had a very strong focus on serious, effective enforcement and we've come into office, we have said that we're going to take a new approach, prioritize things in a world of limited resources and we focus on criminal offenders. We focused on recent border entrants and we focused on people who gain the system. People who have a final order, and don't go home, got their status by fraud, departed the country and came back in illegally.
And we're just serious about enforcing the law but doing it in a way that makes sense and takes into account the fact that we don't have enough resources to remove every single person who's here.
ROBERTS: All right. But your critics and among them are Congressman Hal Rogers, congressman of Kentucky, who says that that policy is like a selective amnesty. If you're focusing your principal attention on felons, repeat law breakers, that there are a lot of people who you're basically giving somewhat immunity to. What do you say to those critics?
MORTON: I say to our critics that if you look at our record, the results speak for themselves. Last fiscal year, this administration removed more people from the United States than any other administration in the history of this country, and that includes criminals and non-criminals.
We focus on making our border secure, and we focus on giving some integrity to the system and we do focus first and foremost on people who pose a threat to public safety, national security, who are criminal offenders. But that doesn't mean we look the other way when it comes to non-criminal violators. And I think the record is very clear on that point.
ROBERTS: You're also getting criticism, John, from the other side as well. In a June memo, I.C.E. instructed its enforcement officers to avoid detaining parents who were caring for children. But critics contend that families continued to be split up and deported, often for minor violations.
Clarissa Martinez from the National Council of La Raza, who was at a meeting with President Obama headed back in March, says, "The gap between the intent and the reality is very, very wide." Is there a disconnect between what's being said in Washington and what's happening on the ground?
MORTON: Well, I think there is a disconnect between some of our critics on the far left and on the far right. The truth of the matter is we are making significant reforms to the detention system and we're just exercising common sense. We have about 30,000 detention beds on any given day that are available to detain people for removal purposes and it doesn't make sense to put a pregnant mother in that detention bed when she will show up for her hearings without being detained or to put somebody who has terminal cancer in that detention bed. We need to put a criminal in that bed, we need to put somebody who is a risk of flight or danger to the community.
ROBERTS: So how is it that some of these families are getting broken up when some of these people might be guilty of a minor violation as opposed to a serious criminal violation?
MORTON: Well, remember, it's against the law to be in the country unlawfully to start with. And if you're committing crimes you're not only here unlawfully, you're also committing crimes. Both of which are a grounds for removal from the country. So I don't think we can be in a situation where we say it's OK to be here unlawfully and it's OK to commit crimes only if the crime isn't a very serious one.
ROBERTS: Right.
MORTON: No, it's not OK to be here, it is not OK to commit crimes.
ROBERTS: But you have made a decision that for some people who are here illegally, that you're going to give them a pass for now.
MORTON: No. We haven't made that. It is that we won't detain them in certain circumstances. They're still removable, we will still charge them with being removable from the country. They'll still need to go to immigration court. It's just that we're being wise about the use of our detention space. It is a limited resource and it makes much more sense to put people who are a threat to public safety than people who are having to take care of small children or the infirmed.
ROBERTS: And John, one other quick point we need to make, because this Arizona law may go into effect in some 48 hours. You're about at the max the number of people you can deport but if the Arizona law goes into effect, you may get reports of a lot more people who are here in the country illegally. Will you be able to handle those extra reports and if other states follow Arizona's lead, will you be swamped?
MORTON: Well, time will tell. We're going to take things as they come. I don't want to speculate at this point as what this we'll get. We're going to enforce federal immigration law to the best we can. Obviously there are some challenges for us from a resource perspective and that's why we have to have priorities. That' why we have to focus on certain classes of offenders over others. Criminals. Recent border entrants. We're going to do the best we can.
ROBERTS: John Morton from Immigration Customs and Enforcement, thanks for joining this morning. Good to talk to you.
MORTON: Good to talk to you. Thank you.
ROBERTS: And with Arizona's controversial law taking effect on Thursday, CNN is going to be there on the ground tracking it all. Join our chief national correspondent John King. He'll be broadcasting his show live from Arizona, starting tomorrow night. That's "JOHN KING USA", 7:00 P.M. Eastern, only on CNN.
CHETRY: Meantime, it's 45 minutes past the hour. Jacqui Jeras is going to be along with the morning's travel forecast right after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Good morning, Atlanta. It's 74 degrees there right now. Not a bad day at all, high of 91 later on. Not really a hot one.
CHETRY: No, it's not bad for -- for what we've had so far in this summer. Boy, we could use a little bit of a break from the steamy weather.
ROBERTS: A team of experts say glass negatives that a California man bought at a garage sale for $45 -- $45 -- were created by famed nature photographer -- yes -- Ansel Adams. The images apparently were taken in the early 1920s and '30s, well before he became nationally recognized. The negatives, which were originally thought to have been destroyed in a dark room fire, are estimated to be worth -- listen to this, bought for $45 -- the estimated value, $200 million.
CHETRY: There you go. That's a great return on your investment.
By the way, he negotiated the guy down from $70.
ROBERTS: I know. Gosh.
CHETRY: Yikes.
Well, we're going to get a check of this morning's weather headlines. Jacqui Jeras, of course, in the Weather Center. Ansel Adams taking some of the most amazing pictures of clouds and -- and some of our national landmarks that you'd ever -- that you'd ever going to see.
JACQUI JERAS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: I know. They're awesome. And did you know that a meteorologist helped to identify some of those photos, by the way?
ROBERTS: Really?
CHETRY: That's pretty neat.
JERAS: Yes. You know, there -- there's a famous photo with the Yosemite Tree by him, and the meteorologist was able to compare the new negatives, the snow cover and the clouds, and said that they were taken about the same time.
ROBERTS: I -- I got to wonder, though, how the guy that sold the photographs to him, the negatives to him, feels this morning.
JERAS: You know, I hope he gives him a little something something. (INAUDIBLE)?
CHETRY: I agree.
ROBERTS: Wouldn't that be nice? Yes.
ROBERTS: Maybe he'll give him his --
JERAS: It'd be nice. $2 million?
ROBERTS: Maybe he'll give him his original $70 asking price.
JERAS: I don't (ph) know about that.
ROBERTS: Here's another $35 for you.
JERAS: Yes, right. You can have that $70, right? Anyway.
All right, let's take a look at the weather and what's been going on this morning. And the big headline, these thunderstorms that we've been seeing across parts of the Midwest as well as the southeast. We've got some picture of damage for you under the Atlanta area from yesterday afternoon. There is widespread damage here, especially in the northern suburbs. One person was injured when a tree fell on a mobile home near Dawsonville.
We also had some flash flooding, as well as many power outages, quite a few delays at the airport, (INAUDIBLE) to Hartsfield-Jackson, the world's busiest airport, yes, delays are going to be expected there once again for today as showers and thunderstorms continue to be the rule of the day across much of the southeast. We also had a possible tornado in Nashville that caused some damage to a few homes, so the National Weather Service going out to assess that damage for today.
The two hotspots, the southeast, as we've mentioned, and then also the Upper Midwest. We've got some nasty thunderstorms rumbling through here at this hour. Minneapolis should see some wicked weather this afternoon. In addition to that, they've got some hot conditions, too, a heat advisory for Minneapolis down towards Omaha.
Travel delays are going to be expected. Hartsfield, as I mentioned, as well as Charlotte and Memphis, we'll see those pop up thunderstorms again in Houston with some really heavy downpours at times. Denver, a few thunderstorms in the area, and then low clouds and fog in Los Angeles and San Francisco as well.
The weather out west starting to calm down a little bit, but we could see some flooding in polices like Utah. Hey guys, I've got some great video about one hour from now, speaking of Utah, by the way. You wouldn't want to miss it. A world's record was broken. That's my tease for you.
ROBERTS: Oh, all right. It will keep us guessing.
Thanks, Jacqui. Looking forward to it. I should say another $25. People who get up at 2:00 in the morning should know better than to try do math, I guess.
JERAS: No problem.
CHETRY: Give him half the negatives back.
ROBERTS: $100 million?
CHETRY: Yes.
ROBERTS: Do that math. That was easy.
This morning's --
JERAS: (INAUDIBLE).
ROBERTS: Thanks Jacqui.
This morning's top stories just minutes away, including Tony Hayward. He can have his life back now. BP's CEO is out as of October 1. We'll take a look at the new guy left to clean up BP's image and the worst oil spill in history.
CHETRY: Also, standing by Breitbart, the blogger who posted the misleading clip that cost Shirley Sherrod her job. Well, now he's headlining an RNC fund-raiser.
Those stories and more at the top of the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Fifty-five minutes past the hour.
The NFL has just released the result of safety test on 16 models of football helmets.
ROBERTS: Earlier on AMERICAN MORNING, I spoke to Dr. Robert Cantu who advises the NFL on head injuries. He is concerned that making the results of that study public might actually put young athletes at risk.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DR. ROBERT CANTU, SR. ADVISER, NFL HEAD, NECK & SPINE CMTE.: It implies that these helmets might be better in protecting against concussion. The document that was released by the NFL clearly states that that isn't the case. But when you have a document that talks about top performing and in the document is the word "concussion", some people might draw the connection.
The reality is that these helmets which meet a standard that really is the top one percent of concussion forces could actually perform more poorly than other helmets at the lower levels of forces. Characteristically helmets made to meet a very high standard or stiffer and often don't perform as well at low forces. And it's the lower forces where the majority of the hits occur in this sport of football and especially in youth football.
ROBERTS: Well, explain that for us if you could, Dr. Cantu. How is it that a helmet that performs well at high impact may not necessarily perform well at lower impacts?
CANTU: Because one of the ways of performing very well at the very high end impacts is to have stiffer material that will not bottom out. That stiffer material does not perform as well as less stiff material at intermediate and lower forces. And in the sport of football that's where the majority of the hits occur and especially, of course, at the youth level.
ROBERTS: And --
CANTU: And that's really my --
ROBERTS: Go -- go ahead.
CANTU: That -- that's my major concern is that people might use this data to suggest these helmets might be better for concussion and especially at the youth level and, in fact, that's not what the release says.
ROBERTS: Right.
CANTU: In fact, that actually might be wrong.
ROBERTS: And in fact, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said now just -- make sure everyone knows that these do not protect against concussions. There are no helmets that protect against concussions. Folks at home who are buying these things for the kids might say, wow, I thought these protected all sorts of brain injury. What really are these helmets designed to do? And how is a concussion different than these helmets may not be protective?
CANTU: Well, John, one of the hats I wear is as vice president of NOCSAE, which is the organization that certifies football helmets, and these helmets are made to a standard to protect against skull fracture and most of the serious intracranial bleeds, the subdural hematomas. They are not made to a standard to protect against concussion and, in fact, they would need to be four times better to be able to do that.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROBERTS: There you go. There's some eye-opening information.
Dr. Cantu, by the way, does say that the NFL has come a long way in acknowledging the dangers of concussion. They're putting posters up in the locker rooms this weekend, giving them to all of the players, to tell them what the dangers of concussion in the long term, how it can impair cognitive ability.
CHETRY: Right. And the question is, though, when you try to win game, are you going to say you're hurt or you're going to try to keep playing?
ROBERTS: Yes, you know, that -- that's where the rubber meets the road against them and the player. The player wants to be in the game.
CHETRY: Right.
We're going to take a quick break. And your top stories coming up in just two minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
