Return to Transcripts main page


Travis Tygart Contradicts Lance Armstrong's Winfrey Confession; Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Interviewed Together on "60 Minutes"

Aired January 25, 2013 - 20:00   ET


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Erin, thanks very much. Good evening, everyone.

Tonight, a remarkable if unlikely partnership from opponents on the campaign trail to pals. President Obama and secretary of state Hillary Clinton sat down together for an interview with "60 minutes" one of a Clinton's last interviews before leaving the state department. We will show you some of that tonight. Could this be a sign of big things for Hillary Clinton in 2016? We will take a look.

And later on in the program, an extraordinary photo journalist, Tim Hetherington, killed in Libya, is remembered tonight. We will reveal what made him so special, why he's so missed. His close friend and colleague, Sebastian, joins us for that. You will hear that from him ahead tonight.

But, we begin tonight with breaking news.

The head of the U.S. anti-doping agency, Travis Tygart, the man who spent years investigating Lance Armstrong, has told CBS News that Armstrong lied about his doping in his interview with Oprah Winfrey. The same interview that was advertised as no holds barred. Lance Armstrong saying he was telling the full truth. The interview where Armstrong repeatedly said he was coming clean about his use of banned substances.

Well now, Tygart, he is the guy whose damning report about Armstrong doping led to the cyclist being stripped of his titles and banned from the sport for life. Tygart also told CBS News he's offered Armstrong a deadline, February 6th, to cooperate fully and totally truthfully with USADA in exchange for a possible lessening of his lifetime ban from sports.

Joining me is now Juliet Macur, sports reporter for "the New York Times," also Betsy Andreu, the wife of Frankie Andreu, a former teammate of Armstrong.

And Betsy, as you have heard, the head of USADA, Travis Tygart, is telling Scott, telling on "60 minutes" that Lance Armstrong lied to Oprah Winfrey particularly about his 2009-2010 attempt at the tour de France. Lance Armstrong said also that only he used a little bit of EPO previously. Travis Tygart said that is absolutely not true. And that also, Lance Armstrong get claimed that he didn't offer USADA, or no one he knew offered USADA a $250,000 donation amid lingering questions about whether he was doping or not. And that he didn't pressure teammates to dope their blood. Travis Tygart says all of that is not true. That he did pressure teammates, that a lieutenant of his did offer a donation that he was doping 2009, 2010, and that he pressured teammates. What's your reaction to what Travis Tygart has said?

BETSY ANDREU, FRANKIE ANDREU'S WIFE (via phone): Well, I think that, remember, in the interview with Oprah, Lance said if he could go back to June when USADA reached out to him, he said he would do anything to have that day back and accept his offer. So despite trying to bankrupt USADA and destroy them, they've graciously given Lance another opportunity to have that day back. And if Lance is truly sorry, he is going to be truthful, and he's going to help clean up the sport of cycling, and tell the truth, no holds barred.

COOPER: I want to play just some of what Travis Tygart has told "60 minutes." This is the first time we are going to see it. Let's take a look.


SCOTT PELLEY, ANCHOR, 60 MINUTES: You know, at one point in the interview, he said that he was curious about the definition of the word cheater. And he looked it up in the dictionary. And didn't think it necessarily applied to him.

TRAVIS TYGART, CEO, U.S. ANTI-DOPING AGENCY: It's amazing. I mean, this guy, you could go to almost any kindergarten in this country, or frankly, around the world, and find kids playing tag, or four square and ask them what cheating is. And every one of them will tell you, it's breaking the rules of the game. No real athlete has to look up the definition of cheating. It's offensive to clean athletes out there working hard to play by the rules, that apply to their sport.

PELLEY: He suggested that cycling in those years was a level playing field because everyone did it. He wasn't doing anything special.

TYGART: It's simply not true. The access they had to inside information, to how the tests work, what tests went in place at what time, special access to the laboratory. He was the one that was in an entirely different playing field than all the other athletes, even if you assume all the other athletes had access to doping products.


COOPER: Ad Juliet, I mean, for him to claim it was a level playing field, there was no team that had as much money as Lance Armstrong's team and as much access to private jets. I mean, it was not a level playing field, was it, Juliet?

JULIET MACUR, SPORTS REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES (via phone): No, not only did the U.S. postal service have the most sophisticated doping program around, but it really wasn't a level playing field when it came to the athletes who are on the team. Some of the athletes didn't require as much EPO to reach a level where they would have to perform, they could perform and some of them like Lance perhaps needed more. So, it wasn't a level playing field among their own teammates, much less in the sport.

COOPER: Betsy, I mean, your husband was on the team. Do you find it unbelievable when Lance Armstrong says he didn't pressure people to dope on the team?

ANDREU: Yes, and maybe in his own mind he thinks that that's how he justifies it, or negates it. I don't quite get it. Because at one point he said he wasn't the enforcer, but then, in another point he said he was the bully. And from our own experience, we know that when Frankie refused to get on the program, to see Ferrari, he was left off the team. He eventually had no job.

COOPER: Ferrari was the doctor. I'm just saying for our viewers.

ANDREU: Yes. So I don't agree with that. Because not everybody -- I think Lance's projecting on to other people what he himself was doing, or what he himself felt.

COOPER: And Juliet, it is interesting. So, you saw as they now offered Armstrong a deadline of February 6th to cooperate with them, with the possibility -- possibility of reducing his lifetime ban. Do you think he will take them up on that, that he would testify that he really would come clean? Because in that Oprah interview, he really didn't go into details about how the doping program worked. He said he only used a little bit of EPO, which Travis Tygart is saying that it is just categorically untrue, that his levels were off the charts.

Do you think - I mean, at this point, having given that interview, can he now come back and say, well, actually, you know, even though my ex-wife did tell me not to dope in 2009-2010, I did. Can he now change his story, Juliet?

MACUR: Sure. I think he can definitely change his story. It might become public, and we won't know that until later. But I think he wants to come forward not necessarily by February 6th. I mean, this just happened this last week or ten days ago or something. He needs some time in order to really realize how he is viewed by the world and how much he really needs to come forward.

And for Travis Tygart to say, Lance Armstrong, really you have to come in by February 6th, I'm not sure that's really the right way to work when it comes to Lance. I mean, he is not the type of guy who really works well with people strong-arming him and head-butting him. I mean, he really needs some time to think about it before he comes forward. So, it will be interesting to see what happens.

ANDREU: Yes, but I don't see that as being, excuse me, I don't see that as being strong-arming Lance. This is not the rules according to Lance. USADA didn't have to do this. USADA is bending over backwards saying, OK, we're giving you yet another chance instead of being really gracious here, I think.

COOPER: It's interesting, Betsy and Juliet, you know, we had Dan Coil on who co-wrote a book on doping, and with the cyclists. And he was saying often with Tyler Hamilton, he was saying that often that Tyler Hamilton, it was difficult for Tyler to tell the full truth all at once. That somebody who has lied for so long, and so extensively, and in the case of Lance Armstrong gone after people like you, Betsy, who were telling the truth, that he is sort of incapable of telling all the truth at once. Do you buy that, Betsy, that for someone who's so ingrained with lying, that it's hard to come forward?

ANDREU: It's definitely hard telling the truth, and contrition, our new concepts to Lance. But he did make the first move. I don't think the Oprah forum was the right way to go. But it's said and done. So now, he's got to mitigate the damage the interview did. And he can do that by telling the whole unadulterated complete truth.

COOPER: I want to play a little bit of what Lance -- how Lance Armstrong described the doping operation to Oprah Winfrey, kind of minimizing it. Let's listen.


OPRAH WINFREY, TV HOST: Travis Tygart said in the statement that you and the U.S. postal service cycling team pulled off the most, his words, sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that the sport has ever seen. Was it?

LANCE ARMSTRONG, FORMER PROFESSIONAL CYCLIST: No. No. And I think he actually said that all of the sport has ever seen. And Oprah, it wasn't. It was -- it was definitely professional. And it was definitely smart, if you can call it that. But it was very conservative, very risk averse, very aware of what mattered.


COOPER: It is interesting, Juliet, at first he, you know, he said, well, compared to the east German Olympic efforts of doping, you know, back in the '70s and '80s, it wasn't as sophisticated. I mean, he's comparing to an East German government effort to dope at the Olympics.

He also denied that even within the sport of cycling, it was not the most sophisticated. But you're saying, Juliet, it's arguable whether in all sports, but in the sport of cycling there was no other team that could do what this team could.

MACUR: Well, I'm not sure. But if there was a team like that, then the U.S. postal service team wouldn't have won seven tours in a row. I mean, that was pretty phenomenal. There was a reason for that. You know, people tend to think it was because they were doping better than everybody else.

COOPER: It's, again, just another development in this ongoing story. We will continue to follow it.

Betsy Andreu, we appreciate talking to you as we have throughout this. And Juliet Macur, thank you very much.

Let us know what you think right now. We are talking about on twitter. Let's continue the conversation on twitter @andersoncooper.

Up next, he is a pride move in Washington, President Obama sitting down for his first joint interview with secretary of state Hillary Clinton and take a listen to some of what they said. And look ahead of what could be next for Secretary Clinton after leaving the state department, a run for 2016? Two different opinions. The raw politics ahead.


COOPER: Raw politics tonight. A first of its kind interview, President Obama sitting down today with secretary of state Hillary Clinton for joint interview which aired this Sunday on CBS "60 minutes." It's one of her last interviews before leaving the state department.

Now, for Secretary Clinton caps off a, obviously, a high-profile week that includes the president's inauguration, testimony in Congress about the Benghazi terror attack and she return to capitol hill to praise John Kerry, his confirmation hearing, to replace her as secretary of state.

But, in the "60 minutes" interview with President Obama offering plenty of praise for her.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Why did you want to do this together, a joint interview?

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, the main thing is, I just want to have a chance to publicly say thank you. Because I think Hillary will go down as one of the finest secretary of states we have had. It has been a great collaboration over the last four years.

I'm going to miss her. Wish she was sticking around. But she has long been so many miles, I can't begrudge her to want to take it easy for a little bit. But I want the country to appreciate just what an extraordinary role she's played during the course of my administration, and a lot of the successes we've had internationally have been because of her hard work.

HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: A few years ago it would have been seen as improbable because we had that very long, hard primary campaign. But you know, I've gone around the world on behalf of the president and our country. And one of the things that I say to people, because I think it helps them understand, I say, look, in politics, and in democracy, sometimes you win elections, sometimes you lose elections. And I work very hard, but I lost. And then President Obama asked me to be secretary of state and I said yes. And why did he ask me and why did I say yes? Because we both love our country.


COOPER: It is incredible when you think about the fierce political rivalry that once existed between these two. Now, the man in two opinions from two very smart reporters and whether or not Secretary Clinton will again make a bid for the presidency.

But first Kate Bolduan takes a look back at how early battles within Clinton and Obama evolved into this partnership.


KATE BOLDUAN, CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have faced questions together before. Here in a 2008 presidential debate with CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

OBAMA: I don't want to just end the war, but I want to end the mind-set that got us in the war in the first place. That's the kind of leadership I'm going to provide as president of the United States.

BOLDUAN: And of course --

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Senator Clinton, that's a clear swipe at you.

CLINTON: Really?

BOLDUAN: Back then it was a very different relationship, in the midst of an already bitter rivalry.

OBAMA: While I was working on those streets, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Walmart.

CLINTON: You were practicing law and representing your contributor, RESTOCK, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.

BOLDUAN: But that relationship quickly changed.

CLINTON: I endorse him and throw my full support behind him.

BOLDUAN: Just as Hillary Clinton showed her support for President Obama, Obama showed his faith in Clinton.

CLINTON: I have no doubt that Hillary Clinton is the right person to lead our state department, and to work with me in tackling this ambitious foreign policy agenda.

BOLDUAN: What was Hillary Clinton's initial reaction when you told her, look, they're considering you for the possibility of secretary of state.


BOLDUAN: Philippe Reines is one of Clinton's closest aides. REINES: I e-mailed her, I think it was the Friday after Election Day, after hearing it from two reporters. And I'm pretty sure her reply was something along the lines of, not for a million reasons.

BOLDUAN: If she was hesitant, why not just say no?

REINES: I think she did, or came awfully close. I think the president was very persuasive.

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: We're delighted to welcome Senator Clinton secretary of state designate.

BOLDUAN: Clinton was quickly confirmed. But how would she get along with the man who defeated her campaign? Could she work for him?

ELISE LABOTT, FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPORTER: Everyone expected, including myself, that there would be a lot of division, a lot of Secretary Clinton going behind the president's back.

BOLDUAN: So was there any tension coming in between the two people at the top?

LABOTT: I think everyone's been surprised.

BOLDUAN: Surprised that while Secretary Clinton and President Obama have been separated often as she travels the world, they have maintained a unified front.

REINES: They very early on set a tone of, this is how it's going to be. She is my secretary of state, and from her point of view, he is our president. And she worked no anything contrary to that.

BOLDUAN: So, what was that moment that you think crystallized the relationship?

REINES: They were in Denmark for a climate change conference.

BOLDUAN: Obama and Clinton believe China and other countries resisting a pollution standards agreement were meeting in secret.

REINES: President Obama and Secretary Clinton were talking kind of alone, you know, in some hallway. And he said, let's go. And she said, let's go.

BOLDUAN: So they just kind of barge in?

REINES: They kind of barged in. They said, hey, guys, what are you doing?

BOLDUAN: We're here.

REINES: What's going on here? We're here. And they got the deal done.

BOLDUAN: They got that deal done, and went on to three more years sharing success, controversy, even tragedy as close partners. REINES: And I think, you know, there are not a lot of people in the world who go through what they do, and, you know, it's the president H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton relationship, it's Carter/Ford, McEnroe/Connors, you know, whatever it is, when you're on the court after the fact, you're like, hey, you're more like me than not. We're bonding. For good or bad, we've been put together. And it's always going to be like that.

BOLDUAN: From rivals to partners, the evolution of this friendship has been something to watch over the last four-plus years. And is now entering a new phase as President Obama takes on his send term, and Hillary Clinton heads towards her last day as a top member of his cabinet.

Kate Bolduan, CNN, Washington.


COOPER: So now, Hillary Clinton is leaving the state department, what is next for her.

Let's bring in chief political correspondent and anchor of "STATE OF THE UNION" Candy Crowley and chief national correspondent, John King.

So Candy, in 2008, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton were, I mean, bitter enemies battling a tough primary season. And now, you fast forward, and there is - I mean, they are doing this high-profile joint interview. What do you make at how their relationship has evolved?

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: I think it evolves out of, you know, political necessity. It's a very powerful force in politics. And it is not the first time that rivals have ended up being friends sort of.

COOPER: Are they friends?

CROWLEY: Well, look, have they been to the White House for dinner? We're told not.

COOPER: See, I find it amazing.

CROWLEY: She owes him a lot and he owes them a lot. And you know, there was the Bushes and the Doles and the Doles and Bushes and the Reagans, and you know, they all didn't get along for a while. And then, you know, the political expediency, political necessity chimed in.

Do I think that they seem to have come up with a relationship that looks at least on the surface like a good one beyond just a good working relationship? It certainly looks like it. And let's remember, Hillary Clinton's been through a whole lot worse than getting defeated by President Obama. So it wasn't that much to get over. And I think they seem as though they're OK with one another.

COOPER: I do find it fascinating, John, that she and former president Clinton have not been over to the White House for a dinner, you know, a double date, if you will.

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Let's see if maybe they have a double date in the second term.

Look. It's not the way this president operates. And it's really not the way the Clintons operate in the sense they were rivals. And there was more bad blood between President Clinton and then president- elect and senator Obama, I think, that even candidate Clinton if you will, back in 2008.

But that was a bitter primary. It took a while to get over it. What did he do? He gave her a global platform. She became one of his most trusted advisers. He is not, as we have discussed in many ways, he doesn't do this with Republicans. He doesn't do it with Democrats either. He's not Mr. Social. But they have formed a partnership.

Is it a close personal friendship? I would not try to make that case. But they formed a partnership where they both trust each other. And as Candy noted, they both helped each other at fairly critical times, including right now.

If this president had a secretary of state who was not such a rock star, who was not so well respected by Republicans, the Benghazi hearings could have been more dicey. Yes, they took some punches at her. Yes, they still have questions for her. But trust me, if it was somebody of lesser stature, it would have been less than what it is and that helps the president.

COOPER: Candy, do you think she will run for president?

CROWLEY: You know, I don't think so. The and I'm sticking with that, because I'd like to be consistently wrong, if she ends up doing it. I don't. I mean, for a couple of reasons.

First of all, she has said, maybe not in the most recent permutations, but she said, I'm not interested in that. I understand the political history. I understand the people out there are going, you could be the first woman. But she will be 69 years old and should she run and get elected. She has been all around the world. The reason her approval ratings are so high is that she's not in politics.

And when you've been out there, you know, in the big city, it's kind of hard to keep them down on the farm. I mean, she has been out dealing with matters of global importance. And what she will have to do, and she'll have an easy time raising money, I grant you, but she'll have to spend the night in many number of places in Iowa and have chicken dinners in Poke County, in New Hampshire, et cetera, and it doesn't seem to me that's where she's headed.

But I will tell you that I didn't think she would run the first time. So, you know again, I don't get that vibe at this moment. I don't think she's made up her mind. I do think that's true. But I just feel like her leaning has always been toward no.

COOPER: It's also interesting in terms of hard to predict. People on her staff said, if you asked them a couple of years ago she would accept secretary of state under Barack Obama, they would have said absolutely no way and yet, here we are.

John, do you think she will run and when would she have to make that decision?

KING: I take her for her word right now she's not running. I'm not convinced she will not run. And to the points Candy made. When they come to her in a year or so and they say, look at the field. Vice president Biden would be the big heavyweight. He's even older than she is. He is a question mark at the moment. He is running. That would be an interesting dynamic.

Then, you look at the field. No offense to Governor Cuomo, Governor O'Malley, Governor Hickenlooper, Governor Patrick, governor anybody else who might be thinking about this on the democratic side. But they're not in Hillary Clinton's league, at least today.

She said her number one mission in life is the global empowerment of women. If they come to her in a year or so and say there's no one out there who can do what you can do, you can raise more money than anybody else, you can wait a little bit longer than anybody else.

Candy's dead right, the Taj Mahal is not in Des Moines, Iowa. And so, when she gets back out on the trail, she was so polarizing as first lady of Arkansas, as first lady of the United States, and when she was running for president, she loves this. She loves being loved and she goes on in a high note.

I think it really depends on her health and what Chelsea does in her family life and professional life over the next couple of years. But the pulse of history will be almost irresistible.

COOPER: There a Taj Mahal in Vegas and so, there is going to be a couple --

CROWLEY: I don't think it's the same though.

COOPER: Well, you never know. Pretty amazing, Candy.

Candy, thanks very much. John King, thank you.


COOPER: Secretary Clinton's glasses are also getting plenty of attention this week. She normally wears contacts, but she has been wearing the black-frame specs since returning to work after treatment for the blood clot. Well, it turns out it's under doctors' orders. And According to CBS, it's to correct double vision following the concussion she suffered last month. It to correct the double vision of top aide since she sees perfectly with that.

A lot of promises of a network of high-speed trains and billions of your tax dollars have already been spent to make this network of high trains a reality.

So, the question we have tonight is, where are those trains? And what happened to all that money? Coming up, "360" investigation you'll only see here.

Plus, he brought us images from the front lines of war like no one else. Now his life is the subject of an extraordinary new film. Tonight, we remember our friend, Tim Hetherington, and his unbelievable journey ahead with Sebastian tonight.


COOPER: Tonight "360" investigation reporting, you will only see here on CNN, a story that you need to know about. Because billions of your tax dollars are at the heart of it. Tax dollars that were given away as part of the Obama administration's stimulus plan, money that the government promised would transform our rail system. It was a very ambitious plan, no doubt about it, when it was first announced. The president, vice president, Ray LaHood, all of the White House announcing a $13 billion plan to bring high-speed rail to America. Listen.


OBAMA: Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 miles an hour. Walking only a few steps to public transportation and ending up just blocks from your destination. Imagine what a great project that would be to rebuild America.


COOPER: Well, that was the idea. It sounded great. Bullet trains literally whisking passengers between American cities. The president outlining his plan to make it all happen. Well, $8 billion in stimulus money to start and $1 billion a year thereafter to match local projects.

"Keeping Them Honest" though it is now three years later and we can't find any high-speed rail that's actually been built. Certainly not on this farmland in California, an area tapped as a high-speed train route. You're going to see fields of almond trees if you go there, lots of dairy farms as well, plenty of cows, but no high-speed trains.

In fact, nearly half of the $8 billion has been pledged to California where they have been planting high-speed rail between San Francisco and Los Angeles for more than 10 years. As word pointed out in this program before, just by 10 years and billions pledged, not a single piece of track on that line has been built.

Where is the rest of the money gone? Some of the money, believe it or not, went to Vermont, a state with no big cities, little congestion. As investigative reporter, Drew Griffin found out, very few rail passengers and even fewer trains.


DREW GRIFFIN, CNN INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was a $50 million federal grant, tax dollars bringing high-speed rail to Vermont, sleek, fast trains taking D.C.ers and New Yorkers up to the tranquil countryside and quaint towns of the green mountain state.

Now, all the work is done. Listen and watch as those trains and your tax dollars whiz by. It's not that Vermont has done anything wrong with the money. In fact, they did a pretty good job. They came in on time, on budget.

They even got the local freight company to kick in another $18 million to improve the rails here. The real problem is, hardly anybody is riding the rails in Vermont. I could stand here almost all day long, not ever worry about getting hit by a train. You can jog on the tracks, go to lunch without looking.

(on camera): Ever worry about getting hit by a train?


GRIFFIN: It's now 3:00, still no train, 4:00.

(voice-over): The sun would set before we would see our first train.

(on camera): It's 8:44, and here it is, the first train that we've seen all day.

(voice-over): And at the busiest station in all of Vermont, 11 people got off. No one got on.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm coming here to visit friends.

GRIFFIN (on camera): How many did you have?




GRIFFIN: Ninety five?


GRIFFIN (voice-over): On average, the train from one end of Vermont to the other carries less than 250 people a day. The next morning the same train traveling south saw 13 people get onboard, including Andrew Menke who is making the trip to New York.

(on camera): How long will it take you?


GRIFFIN: That's kind of a long time.

MENKE: It's probably five and a half to drive, and seven on the bus, and nine on the train.

GRIFFIN: So the train is not your fastest route? MENKE: Not at all. No. I think it's the most comfortable.

GRIFFIN: Do you wish it was more high-speed?

MENKE: I wish it was faster, definitely, high-speed rail.

GRIFFIN (voice-over): That's the other part of this story, the high-speed part. So what do you get for your $52 million share of the $70 million project? Just 28 minutes. That's right. The new train is less than half an hour faster than the old train. In some areas the train gets up to 79 miles an hour, but that's top speed, and just for a portion of the trip.

(on camera): It's not necessarily high-speed rail, it's -- in the traditional sense that we're talking about, it's a little higher speed.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, and we define it up here as higher speed rail.

GRIFFIN (voice-over): Trini Brassard is an assistant director with Vermont's Department of Transportation.

(on camera): So the intent was never to get these Japanese style, European style bullet trains whizzing through Vermont?

TRINI BRASSARD, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, VERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION: No. Our train stops are too close together for us to get up to the speeds, and then to decelerate by the time we get to the next station.

GRIFFIN (voice-over): So if Vermont will never have high-speed rail, why did it get federal high-speed rail money? Randal O'Toole studies urban transportation for the libertarian leaning Cato Institute.

RANDAL O'TOOLE, SENIOR FELLOW, CATO INSTITUTE: Well, the federal government had one criteria when it was passing out high-speed rail funds, and that was, had states done an environmental impact statement, so that the projects would be shovel ready.

GRIFFIN: Vermont had a shovel ready rail project and the White House was ready to shovel out money.

O'TOOLE: It didn't matter whether the project was worthwhile. All that mattered is whether they were shovel ready.

GRIFFIN: As for the low ridership, actually ridership in Vermont is up. Trini Brassard suggested we just had a bad day and if we waited until the late train Friday night on Martin Luther King holiday weekend, we'd see a big crowd getting off at this station.

BRASSARD: We had 28 reservations coming into the Essex Station tomorrow night.

GRIFFIN (on camera): Twenty eight? BRASSARD: Correct.

GRIFFIN: All those people could fit on one bus, right?

BRASSARD: It could, but that's not their choice. Their choice is rail.

GRIFFIN (voice-over): Guess what else is coming to Vermont, even more money from U.S. taxpayers for high-speed rail. That in reality is making slow-speed rail just a little faster.


COOPER: Drew, from your reporting, it seems like a whole lot of money for very little improvement. What is the Obama administration or the Transportation Department have to say about this?

GRIFFIN: Well, you know, this was the first project under this high-speed rail initiative that was completed. And when it was completed, Ray Lahood, the transportation secretary, was out there just praising that, again, that it came in on budget, came in on time.

He said it will move more goods more efficiently. It's going to create jobs for the economy up in Vermont, and it did increase speeds just a little bit. But it did increase speeds. Nothing was said about the fact that this is not high-speed rail.

COOPER: You say even more money is going to Vermont for high- speed rail. Why is more money being spent on the project?

GRIFFIN: Well, they're still working on this same line. Basically another $8 million is going to be spent improving the track on this very train route from what is now the end of the line up to Canada.

Eventually they want to reconnect Montreal to this line, thinking that somehow or another that is going to increase the travel along this line. But again, Vermont says, you will never have the high- speed rail that you or I think of, Anderson. It's impossible given the topography and station closeness.

COOPER: And how many other projects are there in this initiative, this high-speed passenger initiative, and do any of them actually reach high speeds?

GRIFFIN: The answer to your last question, so far, none that we can think of or find out about. There are 154 different projects, $10 billion being spent, some of that work is done. None of them have reached the speeds that, again, you or I think of in terms of the Japanese or the French or these other trains.

We're actually going to go around the country now and try to take a look at each of these individual projects. It's really becoming more or less a hunt for these earmarks that we've done in years past.

Seeing what little improvement, or great improvement, or some improvement has come to the rail lines. But Anderson, as we approach what they wanted, the 21st Century rail network, we're still seeing slow trains going a little faster.

COOPER: And a lot of money spent. Drew, appreciate it. Thanks.

Let us know what do you think about this? Let's talk about it on Twitter right now @andersoncooper.

Up next, remembering an extraordinary life, the life of photographer and filmmaker, Tim Hetherington. We're going to be joined by Sebastian Junger, his friend and colleague, and the director of a new documentary about Tim, joins us ahead.

Also a warning from the CDC about a very contagious virus, not the flu, but can make you miserable in a whole other way. We'll explain ahead.


COOPER: Welcome back. A new HBO documentary is premiering the Sundance Film Festival. It's a film that remembers the photographer and filmmaker named Tim Hetherington who was killed in April of 2011 while covering the war in Libya, in Misrata.

I had the chance to work with Tim in 2009. We spent a week in Afghanistan with the Marines. Here he is with CNN photographer Phil Littleton. During that trip, Tim captured some amazing images as he always did.

He was an incredibly talented photographer, dedicated, fearless, a real gentleman, a pleasure to be with. The HBO documentary is called, "Which Way Is the Front Line From Here, The Life And Time Of Tim Hetherington" and it was directed by Sebastian Junger.

Together Junger and Hetherington made the Oscar-nominated documentary about the conflict in Afghanistan. We're going to hear from Sebastian Junger in a moment, but first, I just want to look at Tim's work in a clip from the HBO documentary.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right over the ridge, man.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was completely surprised by the amount of fighting going on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's still in there!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was interesting is not to belittle the fighting, but I got kind of tired of it. The amount of adrenaline in combat, the important stories is being important to these men. That's what it's about. That's what I'm really there for.


COOPER: "Which Way Is The Front Line From Here, The life and Time of Tim Hetherington" is going to air on HBO in April. I spoke earlier with Director Sebastian Junger.


COOPER: It's hard to believe it's going to be in two years in April since Tim got killed in Libya. Why did you want to make this movie?

SEBASTIAN JUNGER, DIRECTOR, HBO'S "WHICH WAY IS THE FRONT LINE FROM HERE?": Originally, I wanted to understand how he died. There were a lot of questions about it and people who were with him, journalists who were with him came to New York for the memorial service shortly after he died.

And I took the opportunity to interview them with cameras, really interview them in the studio to find out. Then I realized I had sort of the beginning of an incredible and tragic story. Within a couple months I talked to HBO and we decided to make a film and they financed it.

COOPER: What do you think it was that drove Tim? I spent a little bit of time with him in Afghanistan. We were working together there. And he was so interested in combat, but it wasn't sort of the bang-bang. He was very -- it was about people, and sort of the war's impact on people. I thought that really interested him.

JUNGER: We were with the U.S. forces in Afghanistan. There was a lot of combat out there. After a little while, combat gets your attention. It's very intense. But after a while, Tim said the most interesting thing that's happening out here isn't the combat.

It's what happens between the men, between the fire fights, the bonding, the friction, the sense of a group, the loyalty. He said that's really interesting, in some ways more interesting than the combat itself. I completely agreed.

You know, combat is a lot of things. It's not just fear and shooting and all that stuff, it contains boredom, it contains exhilaration and fear and desperation and longing, all the human experiences.

COOPER: And love, too.

JUNGER: And love.

COOPER: The love between the people who fight.

JUNGER: That's right. And Tim and I both were really interested, sort of developing the full spectrum of what happens emotionally in combat.

COOPER: We've got a clip from the film that you made.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My work as a photographer/filmmaker, I always look to be as close to the subject as possible. You're always looking for those moments when the machine breaks down, where there are cracks in it. I think what happened to us, in terms of given access into this remote valley in Afghanistan, is people kind of forgot about us. And I think it was that persistence of going back and back that gave us such unique access. How are you doing? Perfect day for a stroll.

When Tim and I got into the valley, the things that soldiers evaluate are, are you going to cause a problem? Are you going to freak out during combat and need to be taken care of? And finally, are you going to be sort of nasty and political about all this? And Tim and I were clearly not doing that.

Listen up. Today we're going to conduct limited contact in the village. We've got 11 U.S. personnel, and Sebastien needs him. Anybody have any questions?


COOPER: What was he like in the field?

JUNGER: Tim was incredibly dedicated and very loyal to the group. I mean, he broke his leg in combat once, on top of a mountain. It was a trip that I was not on. He was by himself with this platoon. And he walked all night on a broken leg to get down off that mountain.

Because he realized that to sort of be a cry baby about it would have endangered anybody in the group. So he walked all night on a broken leg. He was very -- he really thought sort of situational. Like a fire fight would break out, I would sort of be focused on what was happening right in front of me.

He thought more about the broad perspective of what's happening. You really have to think deeply about these 30 men on this outpost, and what's going on between them.

COOPER: I went to an art gallery where they were showing some of his photographs. He had taken this whole series of shots of soldiers sleeping, which I thought was really interesting.

JUNGER: It was amazing. There's a lot of boredom in an outpost like that even one with as much combat that we had. Days will go by without a fire fight weeks even, and it was very hot. And everyone was kind of asleep. It was like midday. Soldiers sleep as much as they can. And I was just spacing out.

And Tim was running around photographing these soldiers. We talked about it, and he said, look, you never see these images. You see the guys geared up in their helmets and vests and machine guns, and they look very powerful, and they are. But they take this stuff off when they go to sleep and they look like 10-year-old boys.

That's who we have fighting for us, really boys, and they very much look that way when they're asleep. That was sort of the essence of what a soldier is that he caught, that very few photographers would have thought of.

COOPER: I mean, is this story worth dying for? Do you think Tim thought a story was worth --

JUNGER: I don't think -- Tim thought any story was worth dying for, and most journalists I know feel similarly. The question is, which stories are worth risking your life for, and is the risk manageable or not manageable. And anyone who's done war reporting tries to make that calculation in a safe and wise way. Sometimes we're wrong.

COOPER: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

JUNGER: Thank you, Anderson.


COOPER: Tim Hetherington was 40 years old when he died in Libya. He was an extraordinary man, extraordinary life, cut far too short. We'll be right back.


COOPER: Let's get caught up in some of the other stories we're following. Isha is here with the "360 Bulletin" -- Isha.

ISHA SESAY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, first the flu. Now look out for the Norovirus. The Centers for Disease Control says a new strain of Norovirus is spreading across America. This particular strain of the stomach bug was first detected in Australia. It spread through contaminated food or drink or by touching a contaminated surface. Bottom line, wash your hands a lot.

A federal appeals court has throw out two of Casey Anthony's four convictions of lying to police saying it was double jeopardy. Police were investigating the death of her daughter Caylee. Anthony was acquitted of the toddler's murder in 2011.

The S&P has closed above 1,500 for the first time since 2007. Better than expected earnings reports helping to boost stocks.

Anderson, how cool is this. A photograph of a teenage Diana Spencer before she became Diana Princess of Wales has sold at auction for just over $18,000. A British newspaper acquired it after her engagement to Prince Charles.

As you can see, Anderson, the photo is marked not to be published, and until it went on the auction block, it had remained out of public sight.

COOPER: Interesting. I'm confused by the Norovirus, I thought that was the flu. That's different from the flu?

SESAY: That's different from the flu. Just wash your hands.

COOPER: Isha, thanks very much.

Coming up, it's local news reporter versus a goat. This is a very funny "Ridiculist" I got to say. That's coming up next. We'll be right back.


COOPER: Time now for the "Ridiculist." Tonight we're adding goats. Yes, that's what I said, goats and all of them. Goats in general and a few goats in particular like the one that stole the show from a reporter in Florida who was just trying to do her job and report on a county fair.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The judging is complete. Come on out and meet the winners. The goats will be here through Saturday, and they're very friendly. From the Manatee County Fair, Linda Carson, ABC 7 -- would you not eat my pants? I'm fine.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We can never get enough.



COOPER: Thankfully, WWSB reporter Linda Carson was not hurt and she's a great sport about it. She took the whole thing in stride and laughed about it. I hope she doesn't mind when I say, let's roll that one again, please.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you not eat my pants?


COOPER: I watched it like 30 times already. This is not the only goat center in the news lately. In Australia, Gary the goat was exonerated in court. The owner was charged with vandalism after he grazed in a flower bed outside a city museum. Who can forget this goat? He knocked a paperboy of his bike and chased him up a tree. We also think he might be possessed.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It made a weird noise, like a grunting noise.


COOPER: Let's think about this now. We've got goats knocking paperboys off boats, knocking reporters off their feet and vandalizing public property. I'm starting to wonder if the goats are trying to take over. I know for a fact this one has taken over YouTube.

Now, I don't know which I like better, when the goat screams or when that reporter screams. If only we could see them side by side, we can. Look.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you not eat my pants?


COOPER: Nothing like ending a long week by repeatedly watching someone getting knocked over by a goat and hearing a goat scream. Have a great weekend, everybody and watch your backs.

That does it for us. We'll be back one hour from now another edition of 360 at 10 p.m. Eastern, all the latest on Lance Armstrong and some new decisions by USADA about him needing to come clean and accusations that he wasn't telling the full truth. "PIERS MORGAN TONIGHT" starts now.