Return to Transcripts main page


Hijacker Attempts Takeover of Commercial Flight from Ukraine; Man Shot and Killed Inside Movie Theater; Glenn Greenwald Planning Return to U.S.; Battling It Out For Women; Toronto Police Investigating Threat Made Against Mayor Rob Ford

Aired February 7, 2014 - 20:00   ET


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. One threw popcorn, the other opened fire. Tonight for the first time, video of that deadly movie theater confrontation. You can decide for yourself whether the gunman sitting right there acted in self-defense or a murderous rage.

Also tonight, a would-be hijack and his demand take me to Sochi. Opening night of the Olympics with images from a security scare beamed around the world.

And later, can anything more be said about Toronto mayor Rob Ford? Well, there certainly can. He's making new headlines today. You'll hear from a reporter who's just written a book taken you inside his mixed up world.

We begin, though, tonight with gripping images played today in a Florida courtroom. Disturbing images, a surveillance tape showing the moment a gun was fired inside a movie theater just weeks ago killing a 43-year-old husband and father.

In a moment, Martin Savidge will walk us through the video. It's bound to be a crucial piece of evidence in the trial. It was shown on day two of an emotional bond hearing for Curtis Reeves, 71-year-old retired police officer charged with second degree murder. He was denied bond today. Reeves does not deny shooting Chad Oulson. You'll see on the videotape he says he was acting in self-defense. The two men allegedly argued over Oulson's texting during the movie previews. Witnesses said they didn't see any punches thrown, just popcorn. How does that square with what you're going to see on the surveillance tape? That's the question.

Here's Martin Savidge.


MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The video is grainy, but it captures a powerful scene. It comes from a camera mounted on the wall of the theater, and it starts with the lights on. People taking their seats for a matinee of the movie "Lone Survivor". Keep your eye on the far right side. The man in the white-looking shirt is allegedly 71-year-old retired police officer Curtis Reeves. His wife is next to him.

After the lights dim, the camera continues to see in infrared. Watch as Reeves appears to lean toward the front row. Prosecutors say he's complaining to 43-year-old Chad Oulson about using his cell phone. Oulson is just out of view. Reeves leans back, then leans forward again when prosecutors say Oulson said something back. Moments later, Reeves gets up and leaves. Eyewitnesses say he claimed he was reporting Oulson to management. When he returns, witnesses say the men argued again, more loudly.

Now watch this. You see an arm, said to be Oulson's, reaches into view and plunks Reeves' popcorn out of his hand and throws it back at him. And nearly the same time you can see Reeves thrust his right arm forward. Prosecutors say that's the moment Reeves fired a gun pulled from his pocket.

Let's look at that again slowed down. Oulson allegedly yanking the popcorn and throwing it at Reeves and Reeves responding by firing his weapon. You can see the gunshot shock wave dislodged dust around the camera, appearing like snow.

The defense played its own enhanced version of the same video. In it someone seems to throw a glowing object. It appears to hit Reeves and fall to the floor. The defense says that was Chad Oulson throwing his cell phone. Reeves told police he thought Oulson had struck him. Reeves did an audio taped interview with detectives just an hour and a half after the shooting. In it the former SWAT officer says the younger, aggressive Oulson frightened him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So what made you shoot him?

CURTIS REEVES, SHOT AND KILLED CHAD OULSON: Well, I guess it scared the hell out of me. I thought the guy was fixing to beat the (mute) out of me.

SAVIDGE: Also caught on the video, an off-duty deputy can be seen moments after the shot taking control of Reeves gun and remaining with him until police arrive. At the hearing, he testified to a conversation he overheard between Reeves and his wife.

ALAN HAMILTON SENIOR, WITNESS: She postured and she said, that was no cause to shoot anyone. And then he leaned back around and stuck his finger out as to scold her and said, you shut your (mute) mouth and don't say another word.

SAVIDGE: Nicole Oulson, Chad's widow, was also wounded by the shot that killed her husband. And as the judge announced his decision that Reeves was to remain behind bars until trial, she seemed barely able to keep her emotions in check.

Martin Savidge, CNN, Atlanta.


COOPER: A lot of to talk about with our equal justice panel. Joining me now are legal analyst Mark Geragos and criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Sunny Hostin.

Mark, it is kind of stunning just watching that tape. And have watched a lot happened, how quickly he pulls the gun and shoots the guy. It's as if he had the gun almost ready to go. It doesn't seem like there was a lot of like reaching for a gun, taking out of a holster or getting it. It seemed like ready to go. To you, how crucial is the videotape?

MARK GERAGOS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I think the videotape is crucial. And I think the defense-enhanced tape is going to be crucial. Because the defense is going to say that -- and they previewed it today that that enhanced vision of the kind of lit up thing which they identify as the cell phone that in that moment is when he had this fear and that's why he immediately pull out and reacted the way he did. One of the reasons that I just think sometimes some of our gun laws are just so crazy, because people tend to react and overreact and this is what you see.

COOPER: Sunny, to you, does it make a difference whether it was a cell phone being thrown or popcorn?

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, in the real world, no. Because what is it, death by cell phone? Death by popcorn? I mean, there is no reason to meet that kind of force with deadly force. But in Florida, because of stand your ground, it is going to make a difference. Because in Florida it's not even a real risk of imminent, you know, bodily harm or death. It's just a perceived risk. So he perceived that he was going to get hit, and perhaps hurt really badly. And I think under Florida law he may be found to be not guilty under their stand your ground self-defense law. I mean, it's shocking.

GERAGOS: You know, Sunny, the thing that I think is most hurtful to him, if it's true what that officer testified to, that his wife started wagging the finger at him and saying you overreacted, that's some pretty powerful evidence to have to contend with if you're the defense.

HOSTIN: Well, I think that's true. Because as a former police officer, he's trained to assess threats.

COOPER: That's what I was going to ask. Does it work against him that he was a former police officer?

HOSTIN: I think it does. I think it should. Because since he's trained in threat assessment, how could he say that was threatening that he got a cell phone thrown at him and that he got popcorn thrown at him that would be sufficiently enough trigger for him to be able to use deadly force.

But on the flip side, I think a juror may think, well then because he's trained, certainly he can assess a threat properly and this guy was really in fear for his life, which is again, if we were in the real world and New York courtroom perhaps or D.C. courtroom, we wouldn't even be talking about this case.

COOPER: You look at the speed with which this is happening. I mean, the object is thrown, and the gun is out and boom.

GERAGOS: The gun is out. COOPER: Mark, was it the right decision for the judge to deny the guy bail? Or was it surprising?

GERAGOS: I struggle over stuff like this.


GERAGOS: You do have a presumption -- you have a presumption of innocence. You do have a tape, but you know, we've seen tapes before. They don't always carry the day. And is he a threat? I don't know.

HOSTIN: He's a threat, Mark, to anyone that likes to text. He's a threat to anyone that has a phone. He's a threat to movie theaters. Are you kidding me?

GERAGOS: If it was just texting, I'm with you. The fact that somebody reached around, grabbed something, threw something at him and he's 71 and I don't know what his mental state is, you know, there's I think ways to confine him to the house prior to him being convicted if he's going to be convicted and not having him in possession of a weapon at this point. I just don't know that a 71-year-old --

COOPER: Also, it looks like there's a lot of empty seats in that theater.

HOSTIN: Why not just move?

COOPER: Get up and move.

HOSTIN: Why not just move? This person should never be on the street. He can't -- I'm with the judge did the absolute right thing here because he's a menace obviously to society.

COOPER: I mean, this isn't just stand your ground like you don't have to run away. This is like keeping your seat, you know. It's like you have a right to whatever seat in the movie theater.

HOSTIN: I mean, come on.

COOPER: It would be comical if somebody didn't get killed here. It's unbelievable.

GERAGOS: Exactly true. It is unbelievable.

COOPER: Mark, appreciate it. Sunny, we'll see you. We're going to continue to follow this one.

In another Florida courtroom day two of testimony in the Michael Dunn murder trial. Prosecutors say he shot an unarmed African-American teenager to death after a fight over loud music at a gas station. But the teen who died, the defense argues the teen and his friends were in fact armed and that police botched the investigation. No weapon was ever found.

Tory Dunnan was in court today, has new developments.


LELAND BRUNSON, WITNESS; When I reached and touched him, blood appeared on my fingers.

TORY DUNNAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Michael Dunn, the man charged with first degree murder in the Jordan Davis case, looked on as witnesses relived the night the 17-year-old was shot and killed. Davis's best friend Leland Brunson among those who testified.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you love Jordan Davis?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you lying for Jordan Davis?


DUNNAN: He was sitting next to Davis in the back of a red SUV when an argument over loud music broke out at a Jacksonville gas station.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's fair to say he asked for a common courtesy just to lower the music, correct?


DUNNAN: Kevin Thompson, another teen in the SUV says Dunn who was in his parked car next to them asked them to turn down the music. Thompson described it in court as pretty loud and said Dunn told them --

KEVIN THOMPSON, WITNESS: Turn your music down. I can't hear myself think.

DUNNAN: Everyone agrees the music was turned down, but that's when things escalated between Davis and Dunn.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Isn't it true that Jordan Davis said to you, (mute) that turn it back up.

THOMPSON: Yes, sir.

DUNNAN: Thompson testified he did exactly that, and that he turned the music back up. It is at that point the timeline gets fuzzy. Dunn told investigators he heard threats, then saw a weapon.

MICHAEL DUNN, SHOT AND KILLED JORDAN DAVIS: I saw a barrel come up on the window. Looks like a single shot shotgun where there's a barrel. And see this part of the barrel, I saw that part of the barrel. It was either a barrel or a stick. But sir, they're like, we're going to kill you.

DUNNAN: Dunn by his own admission says he pulled out a gun he kept in his glove compartment. He says in self-defense fired multiple times. Jordan Davis was shot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What did the driver do with the gun when he grabbed it from the glove compartment?

BRUNSON: He cocked it back.

DUNNAN: As for Michael Dunn's claims of being threatened with a weapon first, police say they never found a weapon inside the teen's SUV. In court all three teens maintained they never had a weapon.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you got out of the car in the plaza, did you take anything out of your car?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Like for example, did you take a shotgun?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And like shove it under a car that was in the parking lot?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you try to throw it out on the south side boulevard?


DUNNAN: One officer who arrived shortly after the shooting described what he saw.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I saw a young black male sitting on the driver's side rear passenger seat sobbing uncontrollably it is cradling a another young black male's head.


COOPER: Tory Dunnan joins us now from Jacksonville with more. Do we know -- did Jordan Davis ever get out of the SUV? Because that keeps coming up in court, doesn't it?

DUNNAN: Yes, Anderson, it comes up all the time. And it's really key to the claim of self-defense. I want to point out the defense attorney is saying making the argument that Jordan Davis is the only one in that SUV who didn't duck because he was trying to get out of the car. But today, his best friend actually testified he saw Jordan Davis touch the handle. But Anderson, he says he never opened the door, never tried to get out.

COOPER: All right, Tory Dunnan, appreciate the update. Thanks very much.

Let's talk about both cases on twitter right now. You can follow me @andersoncooper, tweet using #ac360.

Coming up nest after the break, would-be hijacker is in custody in connection to the Olympics. Late word on what happened on a Turkish airliner today and what authorities fear might happen next. Also tonight, he broke Edward Snowden's story. I'm going to talk to Glen Greenwald about returning to America and the possibility of facial criminal charges.


COOPER: Well, it's a terrifying possibility for several days now. It has been the official Olympic nightmare scenario. Somebody smuggles a bomb onto an airliner, the explosives concealed perhaps in a tube of toothpaste of cosmetics and they detonate and the plane goes down. Thankfully today, it didn't come to pass. But what happened on board, this Turkish airliner was enough to launch fighter jets, light up command center and make the world hold its put to breath.

Ivan Watson joins us now from Sochi with the latest in the hijacking attempt that targeted the city where he is standing.

So, what do we know now? We know -- I mean, there was no bomb or explosive device on the plane, correct?

IVAN WATSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. Turkish officials say they did not find any bomb and no passengers, no crew members aboard this flight had been flying from the Ukraine to the Turkish city of Istanbul were injured. But the timing couldn't have been more dramatic as the lavish opening ceremonies were under way here in Sochi in the arena in the stadium behind me.

Turkey, the Turkish air force, was scrambling f-16 fighter jets to intercept this airliner as it was flying over the black sea because a Ukrainian man stood up and announced that there was a bomb in the cargo hold and demanded that the plane be diverted here to Sochi. Instead, the pilot landed the plane at an airport in Istanbul, and that is where there was a standoff for some time until Turkish security forces, they disabled this man. They took control of him.

Turkish officials say they had to actually use force against him, not guns, but he was injured and we've seen him in Turkish custody since. All the passengers were safely evacuated. But a tense moment that thankfully ended without any serious casualties or harm to any civilians -- Anderson.

COOPER: So you're saying he was Ukrainian. Do we know anything a motive? So we know more about him?

WATSON: No. At this point, no. Well, aside from the fact that he's about 44 years old, the Turks have announced his last name is Kozlov. We don't know his motivations right now. And there are any number of possible reasons behind this. You know, the Ukraine has a very serious political divide right now. We, of course, know that there are Islamist groups that have threatened to target the Sochi Olympics. This man wanted to divert the flight. And then Turkey itself has all sorts of problems, everything from a Kurdish insurgency to its own internal disturbances. There are a wide variety of groups that have carried out acts of political acts of violence there from leftists to Islamists on the right side. So we don't really know yet. We're waiting for some kind of information from either the Turks or the Ukrainians to explain why this man could have done this. An even some Ukrainian media have announced maybe the guy was just drunk and got totally out of control. The Turks are saying he never got into the cockpit. They have also said that no, they don't think he was drunk but he could have been under the influence of some other substance. So we'll probably find out in the morning hours, maybe a little bit more why and how this could have happened. But it is certainly raised more security jitters around an Olympics that is perhaps one of the most complicated and has had a lot of security concerns going into these weeks of sports and competition, Anderson.

COOPER: All right, Ivan, thanks very much.

For more on the threat, we want to figure out what the procedures are in place to deal with something like this on a U.S. carrier. I want to bring in former U.S. air Marshall, Darrelle Joiner.

Thanks very much for being with us. I'm going to ask you bunch of questions and use your judgment. Obviously, I don't want you to give up anything that is, you know, proprietary information that would, you know, make it easier for somebody to do this. But as an air Marshall, obviously, there are things you look for, clues you look for. But I would imagine somebody who says they have an explosive on board the plane is probably the worst case scenario, worse than somebody who just has a weapon them.

DARELLE JOINER, FORMER U.S. AIR MARSHALL: Yes and no, Anderson. Number one, I mean, one thing about air marshalls are they are confident, they are skilled, they are trained, highly trained as you say. There are so many other elements that are in place to prevent things like this from happening. So everyone, we have our great ground security, the TSA security screeners. So, we have the confidence knowing they will properly check and screen. So, when we have a person to get up and possibly announce something like that of course you're alarmed and senses are going to go off. But at the same time, my first thought as an air Marshall when I was flying, would be to make sure that I'm going to put myself in a position to be in command and communicate with my partners and the rest of the team to make sure we're all looking at the same thing.

At the same time, we have citizens today in all the American folks that are flying today are so much on high alert. They possibly may take action. But at the same time we also want to make sure we want to identify that this is not a ruse.

COOPER: Right, I mean, the concern with the explosive is there could be some sort of detonator that the person could have in their hand and that's just something instant that they could explode. That's the most difficult scenario.

JOINER: Absolutely. You know, and then it has to be up to the individual air Marshall team to make that decision. Again, you're going to assess the situation, you are going to look at everything and you also going to consider all the factors that I just mentioned earlier and with the different security issues and different things we have in place to make sure we don't have that happen.

But at the same time, if someone's going to get up and explode or detonate an actual explosive there's nothing we can do about it. But if they're going to talk about it, there's definitely action we can take. And that's possibly taking close quarter combat or anything of that nature depending how close you are to that person or group of people. At the same time you can also go dynamic if you think you need to, leading up to possibly deadly force if it's needed.

But at the same time, we want to make sure -- the air marshalls make sure that their first mission is to make sure that airplane is going to land safely. You have cockpit doors today reinforced. They're not concerned about anyone kicking the doors down.

I really believe the citizens today when you see those type of threats made they're going to stand up. No one's going to go out without a fight. So, as an air Marshall, you want to make sure you've got to position yourself again to be in command when needing to be.

COOPER: And the good news this person never even got close to the cockpit which is certainly a blessing.

JOINER: Absolutely.

COOPER: Darelle Joiner, appreciate you being on.

As always, you can find out more on the story at

Just ahead tonight, journalist Glenn Greenwald explains why he's now actually considering returning to the United States. He's been in Brazil all this time since he has been publishing the revelations by Edward Snowden. The question is, will he be charged with aiding and abetting NSA leaker Edward Snowden. We will talk to him ahead.

Also ahead tonight, the war to win over women voters heats up. Republican Rand Paul is taking aim at former President Clinton. Some pretty blunt remarks. Also even bringing in Hillary Clinton. True politics ahead.


COOPER: American journalist Glenn Greenwald says he may be ready to return to the United States to call the government's bluff to see if the justice department actually dares to prosecute him. Greenwald, as you know, broke the story about the NSA extensive surveillance of American citizens and foreign heads of state. His reporting on the NSA documents leaked by Edward Snowden have made him a target for some U.S. officials. One of the charge Snowden is facing is theft of government material and some of Greenwald's critics content that he is complicit in that fact.

Here's what U.S. Congressman Peter King told me back in June when I asked him if he thought reporters who helped reveal the leaked documents should be punished.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. PETER KING (R), NEW YORK: If they willingly knew that this was classified information, I think action should be taken especially something of this magnitude. I know the whole issue of leaks has been gone into over the last month. But I think something on this magnitude there is an obligation both moral but also legal. I believe against a reporter disclosing something which would so severely compromise national security.


COOPER: Well, question is has it really compromised national security? What harm has it actually done? That's an open question.

Here's Representative Mike Rogers, chair of the house intelligence committee, questioning FBI director James Comey this week.


REP. MIKE ROGERS (R), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: So if I'm newspaper reporter for fill in the blank, and I sell stolen material, is that legal because I'm a newspaper reporter?

JAMES COMEY, FBI DIRECTOR: Right. If you're a newspaper reporter and you're hocking stolen jewelry, it's still a crime.


COOPER: So, now to be clear, Comey went on to say that it's not clear that journalism based off the Snowden leaks was criminal because the first amendment protections journalists are privy to. Greenwald who lives in Brazil hasn't been back to the states since the story broke for obvious reasons. But the questions is, why is he considering it now?

Glenn Greenwald joins me tonight.

So Glenn, just to be clear from the start, do you expect to be charged if and when you return to the United States?

GLENN GREENWALD, JOURNALIST: I don't know. I mean, if I were going to place a bet I would say it's less than 50 percent. But at the same time, I think the risk is something greater than trivial. And so, that's why when the more senior officials in the Obama administration start using language to describe you, that's clearly from the criminal law designed to criminalize your journalism you take it seriously.

COOPER: I mean, regardless of what might happen, are you willing to take that risk on principle?

GREENWALD: I'm definitely going to take the risk. I mean, I refuse as you say on principle to be kept out of my own country because of threats to criminalize me for engaging in journalism, which the first amendment to the United States constitution guarantees that I have the right to do without interference. So I am not going to let a bunch of reactionaries in the U.S. government who are afraid of transparency criminalize journalism to the point where I stay out. I just want to make sure that when I come back I do it in a way that's as careful as possible.

COOPER: I want to play more of what Congressman Mike Rogers said alluding to you. Let's listen.


ROGERS: There have been discussions about selling of access to this material to both newspaper outlets and other places. Mr. Comey, to the best of your knowledge is fencing stolen material, is that a crime?

COMEY: Yes, it is.

ROGERS: And would be the selling the access of classified material that is stolen from the United States government, would that be a crime?

COMEY: It would be. It's an issue that can be complicated if it involves a news gathering, a news promulgation function. But in general fencing or selling stolen property is a crime.


COOPER: So, how do you respond to that, Glenn?

GREENWALD: Nobody's fencing stolen property. And Mike Rogers knows that full well. What this is about is trying to take journalism that they dislike because it shines a light on what they're doing, namely invading the privacy rights of millions of Americans without their knowledge, and trying to turn it into a crime by intimidating the journalist out of continuing to report, just like all repressive and authoritarian politicians around the world always do.

Thomas Jefferson said 200 years ago those who most fear investigation of their actions are the first ones to attack a free press. What they're talk about is called freelance journalism. When you're a journalist like Bart Gellman is or like I am that have done the NSA reporting and you go to a newspaper and say I have a big story.

And I want to report it with you and you enter into a contract will them and they pay you as a journalist to write the story and you then publish it. That has been called for 250 years in the United States journalism. Mike Rogers and James Clapper seem to think that should be called a crime. The U.S. constitution unfortunately for them is very clear we have freedom of the press in the United States.

COOPER: About coming back to the United States, I don't know if you want to telegraph that or not, but do you know when you might do that?

GREENWALD: Well, there was a recent report in Buzzfeed that seemed to be based on a leak that I can't confirm. But the story was that I and Laura and Bart have won the Polk award, one of the most prestigious journalism awards in our profession.

COOPER: That's in April,

GREENWALD: Over reporting that we've done.

COOPER: That's in April.

GREENWALD: Right. There's a ceremony in April. And I like the symbolism of going back, to receive a very prestigious journalism award for this NSA reporting and testing whether the U.S. government is really prepared to arrest a journalist, an American journalist under those circumstances. I think sooner rather than later I will test this principle that we do actually or we are supposed to have a free press in the United States and you don't get thrown in jail for doing journalism.

COOPER: Glenn Greenwald, good to have you on.

Let's get caught up on some headlines. Gary Tuchman has a 360 Bulletin.

GARY TUCHMAN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, hello. The State Department says American, Kenneth Bae who's being held in North Korea has been moved from a hospital to a labour camp. The State Department is concerned about Bae's health and urging them to release them. Last month, the American missionary told reporters he committed a quote, "serious crime against North Government.

A New York City family and close friends gather to remember fellow actor Philip Seymour Hoffman at a private funeral. He died Sunday of an apparent heroin overdose.

The U.S. economy added 113,000 jobs last month. That's more than December but far short of expectations.

A giant new Sperm herb of jellyfish in Australia is five feet in dime diameter. If it stings you it won't be deadly. For now some scientists like to use the nickname big snotty for obvious reasons -- Anderson.

Yikes. I don't know how they know it will hurt, but it's not deadly. Has anyone actually been stung by this?

I don't know the answer to that but I don't want to volunteer to be stung by it.

COOPER: Gary thanks.

In politics, when the women's vote you stand a good chance of winning big this November. So next, which party has the winning policies no let important the winning message? Are Democrats pandering, Republicans waging a war on women as Democrats claim?

Later tonight, thinking everything about Toronto mayor Rob Ford's colourful life? Hear from the author of a new book "Crazy Town, The Rob Ford Story."


COOPER: In true politics tonight, the effort to win over women voters, the electoral need is obvious. Republicans seeking to reverse a hefty gender gap from 2012 and Democrats trying to maintain their advantage, now each side is selling itself as if the mid-term elections depend on it. Only Republican Rand Paul is selling like its 1994. His line of attack, he says Democrats can't really speak for women as long as the president back in 1994 speaks for Democrats, Bill Clinton.


SENATOR RAND PAUL (R), KENTUCKY: The Democrats can't say we're the great defenders of women's rights in the workplace and we will defend you against some kind of abusive boss that uses their position of authority to take advantage of a young woman when the leader of their party, the leading fundraiser in their country, is Bill Clinton who was a perpetrator of that kind of sexual harassment.


COOPER: Well, Rand Paul during a C-Span interview that airs this weekend. He also recently called Mr. Clinton a serial predator. You can agree or disagree with their premise or the logic during the political wisdom of his argument. Whatever you think of it, it's probably the only one out there. Both parties are now trading verbal blows over who really stands for women.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The Republicans don't have a war on women. They have a war for women.

SENATOR BARBARA MIKULSKI (D), MARYLAND: We, the Democratic women have joined together to say, let's give the American women a raise so they can raise their families.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We are empowering women. We are training women.

REPRESENTATIVE NANCY PELOSI (D), MINORITY LEADER: To unleash the power of women in the workplace and in our society is to strengthen America.

REPRESENTATIVE ERIC CANTOR (R),MINORITY LEADER: We have any number of Republican women in our conference who are real leaders.

REPRESENTATIVE CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS (R), WASHINGTON: If you would have told me as a little girl that I would one day put my hand on the bible and be sworn in as the 200th woman to serve in the House of Representatives, I wouldn't have thought it possible.

REPRESENTATIVE RENEE ELLMERS (R), NORTH CAROLINA: If you want to talk about a war on women, look no further than this health care law.

SENATOR PATTY MURRAY (D), WASHINGTON: What does blocking a minimum wage increase say about their priorities when it comes to American women?

(END VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: So both sides certainly at least verbally focusing on women. Continue the conversation now with Sandra Fluke who came under attack especially from Rush Limbaugh for advocating for contraception coverage in the afFordable care act. Currently she is running for the California State Senate and also CNN political commentator and GOP consultant, Margaret Hoover.

Sandra, let's start with you. I mean, as we said, you were caught in the middle of the so-called Republican war on women with the Democrats were calling a war on women back in 2012. What do you think about what Rand Paul is saying? Is it an effective weapon against Democrats to bring up Bill Clinton?

SANDRA FLUKE, SOCIAL JUSTICE ATTORNEY: Look I think it's obvious that we are all, whether Democrat or Republican, against sexual harassment. But this isn't what women today want to hear about. They want to hear about the issues that are impacting their lives. Issues like fair pay when we're still being paid 77 cents on the dollar 84 cents in California.

Issues like the childcare crisis I'm advocating with raising California together. They want to hear about how we are going to take care of their economic concerns, how we're going to continue to address the crises of epidemic proportions of violence against women. That's what women need right now and that's what they're asking their elected officials to be leaders on.

COOPER: So bringing up for you bringing up Bill Clinton is what?

FLUKE: It's a long time ago and it's not what they want to talk about. It's clear where folks' positions are on sexual harassment. What they want to hear is what are we going to do about paid family leave in California what are we going to do about making sure that if you take paid family leave, your job is there and protected for you when you get back.

COOPER: Margaret, do you think this is an effective strategy to bring up Bill Clinton as kind of cudgel against Democrats?

MARGARET HOOVER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Look, I know our instinct is to say wow this is so 1994. When I first heard him say it on "Meet The Press," Anderson, two weeks ago, I have to say I think Sandra's response demonstrates it is politically effective. It has gotten some traction. It's not like what Rand Paul said wasn't true. I mean, Bill Clinton actually did have an inappropriate relationship with a very young woman in the Oval Office. And that contrasted against this narrative that Republicans have a war on women, I actually do think it was an effective rhetorical tool. And it has gotten Republicans some play.

COOPER: You think that taints all Democrats' message on women's issues?

HOOVER: It's a fair argument to say are you really who's really the party that has the war on women when you all are going out and fundraising on this, but I thought it was very effective. I have to say. I don't think that the Republican Party should double down. I think one Senator from Kentucky can say it and make his point. I do not think this should be the platform of the Republican Party to push back on in the context of effective rhetorical tool Sandra's answer demonstrated that. She didn't want to address it. She had to pivot to the issues she wanted to talk about.

COOPER: Sandra, were you pivoting?

FLUKE: I think it's just as ridiculous to say that every Democrat is in line with Bill Clinton's behaviour and supports that than to say that every Democrat or every Republican, excuse me, believes that there are forms of legitimate rape or that a pregnancy conceived through a sexual assault is a blessing from God. These are ridiculous things to say to women, and they're what we're hearing from Republican Party elected leaders and candidates time after time.

Now, they've tried to have trainings to show candidates how to talk to women, and it keeps not working. We just heard from Mike Huckabee about Uncle Sugar and women who can't control their libido. The reason these trainings aren't working on how to talk to women voters is that it's just talking points. You can't cover up when a candidate has really disrespectful views about half of our population.

COOPER: Just for accuracy sake, Huckabee was saying that that's what that's the way Democrats viewed women, whether it was the right thing to say or artfully said at all.

FLUKE: I understand the entire context of what he said and I think it was very offensive to many women, as we can tell by their reaction.

COOPER: Margaret, in the new CNN/ORC poll when you separate out women and ask them if the Republican Party understands their problems and concerns, 43% of those under 50 said yes and only 33 percent of women older than 50 agreed. You say you suspect these kind of numbers are related to abortion debate?

HOOVER: Look, I think in Sandra's the first person who would agree with this. I think there's two ways to look at the women's issue and the women's vote. Women aren't a monolith. All issues apply to which the one issue is the pro-life/pro-choice debate. I do think that is very generational. I think you see women from the second wave of feminism 70s and 80s sort of came of age in the 70s and 80s and that is the most important issue to them or one of the most important issues to them.

When you look at millennial women 30 and under, they are not as adamantly pro-choice as older generations are. Certainly, they don't want the right to be taken away from them or they don't want the ability to have that choice be between their doctor and themselves, their God and their family. But it is treated differently.

COOPER: Sandra, you're shaking your head.

FLUKE: I am shaking my head because the millennial generation research shows is the most pro-choice generation in this country. And it is I think insulting to women to say that the only issue that women's issues concerns is talking about reproductive justice. That's a core issue.

HOOVER: That's not what I'm saying.

FLUKE: Things like raising the women wage when two-thirds of minimum wage workers are women. That's wouldn't things we're addressing in California. That's not the only thing women are focused on. And just looking at this number, these numbers, shows that women have serious concerns with where the Republican Party is right now. Young, unmarried women have repeatedly voted for democratic candidates in recent elections because they're unhappy with where the Republican Party is right now.

COOPER: I got to wrap it up. Margaret, that's not what you're saying.

HOOVER: It's not what I'm saying. For example, Sandra, I couldn't agree with you more. The Republican Party is doing a better job. Kathy McMorris Rogers is doing this. Going out and saying look all issues are women's issues. Women, 60 percent of them or more are the ones who are starting small businesses. Guess who's getting hit by small businesses.

The small business -- Obamacare law is hurting small businesses and women disproportionately. It's a great example of a Republican woman taking a Republican message and explaining and making the case for Republican policy and women.

COOPER: Margaret Hoover, Sandra Fluke, appreciate it.

One thing it doesn't take to be an ambassador overseas, knowing something about the country they're sending you to. Today hearings for president Obama's pick for ambassador to Argentina, Noah Bryson Mamet, and Senator Marco Rubio asked a question that should have had an easy answer.


SENATOR MARCO RUBIO: Have you been to Argentina?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator, I haven't had the opportunity yet to be there. I've travelled pretty extensively around world, but I haven't yet have a chance.


COOPER: Hasn't been there! The guy who hopes to be ambassador to Argentina has not been to Argentina this. Comes on the heels of Senator John McCain's questioning of the White House's pick for ambassador of Norway, if you have small children in the room ask them to turn away because this is painful to watch.


SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: What do you think the appeal of the progress party was?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'll tell you Norway has been very quick to denounce them.

MCCAIN: The government has denounced them? They're part of the coalition of the government?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I stand corrected. Would like to leave my answer as, it's a very, very open society.


COOPER: I stand corrected. He went on to say, by the way, he's never been to Norway either, the guy who's going to be ambassador to Norway. What's going on? ABC News' Jonathan Carl asked State Department spokesman Jen Psaki today about it. Let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How much does it cost to become an ambassador, to be named ambassador in the Obama administration?

JEN PSAKI, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESWOMAN: Jonathan Carl, always a TV question. We don't determine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a serious!

PSAKI: It is a serious question. We don't name ambassadors from the State Department. The White House names ambassadors. So I would certainly point you to my old colleagues across the street for that.


COOPER: Across the street is the White House. They pick the ambassadors. What Jonathan Carl was getting at was a "New York Times" report showing the nominee to Argentina raised $1.7 million for president Obama since 2007. The Norway guy, $750,000 and in case you're wondering, he was confirmed as ambassador earlier this week. So he gets to go to Norway for the first time in his life.

We're going to be focusing more on this. By the way, this isn't just a thing under the Obama administration. All presidents do this, rewarding their high profile donors with ambassadorships. We should also say a lot of good ambassadors out there from the State Department who actually have experience. But these guys do not have experience.

Up next, police investigating a new threat against Toronto's controversial Mayor Rob Ford and a new book comes out with some pretty wild revelations. Going to talk with author Robin Doolittle.


COOPER: Police in Toronto are investigating a threat made against the city's controversial, Mayor Rob Ford. Mayor Ford has made headlines obviously in the past couple months most famously for admitting the smoking crack cocaine while on a drunken binge. There have been bizarre videos of him as the one here. Robyn Doolittle takes us inside Mayor Ford's wild world into her new book "crazy town the Rob Ford Story." I spoke to you earlier. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: In your new book" Crazy Town" you say the Ford think of themselves as the Kennedys, Canadian Kennedys.


COOPER: Which is -- of all the families I could possibly think of that's not the first family that pops in my mind?

DOOLITTLE: They think of themselves as a dynasty. The father, Doug Ford Sr., was a member of provincial parliament. Rob Ford now, the mayor, his brother, Doug, is a councillor. Rob Ford has ambitions of being prime minister. He wants to be premiere of Ontario. Which leaves the city council seat open which they're already saying another Ford will run in that seat? They really do believe they are born to lead the country.

COOPER: Is he still popular?

DOOLITTLE: He is still popular. He's unclear whether he can get re- elected. His approval ratings are still in the 40s. He was elected with 47 percent. Now approval rating isn't exactly the same thing as voting intention. The question will be though if he can keep his nose clean for the next little while. He does have this uncanny ability to connect with voters. He really will phone you back. If you phone Rob Ford, he will call you back. And that's I think a real message for politicians in general. Is that people feel so silenced, so unheard that they are willing to overlook all this other stuff?

COOPER: You also talk in the book about a conversation between Rob Ford's wife and a confidante you heard a recording of. She denies is ever happened.

DOOLITTLE: The Mayor's wife, who we don't know a lot about, and we're reluctant to report on her because they have their own domestic issue, So after he was elected she met with someone that she trusted who was a former drug addict and was saying I don't know what to do. He's the mayor now. There's going to be all this scrutiny. He needs to clean up. And according to her, they had a conversation about this.

And Rob Ford said to his wife, OK, I'm still going to party. I'll give up the pills but not the blow. And that's kind of why Rob Ford is sort of a joke and it's funny when you're seeing videos of him drunk driving and knocking over councillors and saying lewd comments. He is involved in things you can't have elected officials involved in.

COOPER: Ford's lawyer says the conversation inform took place?

DOOLITTLE: My understanding of the quote she does not recall this conversation.

COOPER: For now, Rob Ford is here to stay. There's no way to get him out. He just continues along.

DOOLITTLE: In Toronto everyone's moved on from that. He's going to stay. See what happens in October. Nothing could possibly happen that would have him be removed at this point.

COOPER: He says that he's able to still function, that he's able to do his job unimpeded. I just find that hard to believe for somebody who's out at a fast food restaurant seemingly impaired late at night. It just seems like you can't be waking up refreshed in the morning.

Yes. I think a lot of people don't have an understanding of what Rob Ford's mayor Alsy has looked like. He doesn't send out his schedules in the morning. Doesn't take questions, doesn't answer questions he doesn't want to.

A lot of reporters throughout his tenure don't know what he does on any given day.

That is the point. We spent the first year and a half, two years of his mayor Alsy knew there was a problem but the public didn't know. Hopefully what I do with this book, this is a footnote, what was happening behind the scenes.

COOPER: It's an incredibly well-timed book. Congratulations. "It's Crazy Town! Thank you, Robyn.


COOPER: Just ahead, a former drug dealer finds redemption in rescuing animals. How his chance encounter with a tiny abused dog turned his life around. You're definitely going to want to see this. Great story!


COOPER: It's not often you hear about a mob enforcer who manages to turn his life around let alone become an animal whisperer. Tonight's "American Journey," a pretty remarkable of redemption. All thanks to a very small dog. Tom Foreman has the story.


TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This may look like an animal rescue, but for James Giuliani it is more like redemption.

JAMES GIULIANI: I was a bad person my whole life. Now I feel good about waking up in the morning and going out.

FOREMAN: It was so bad, and now it's so good. His turn around is the focus of a new reality show on the Oprah Winfrey Network.

GIULIANI: I used to deal cocaine, marijuana, stick people up.

FOREMAN: He used to work with the toughest mob bosses around New York unless one day he found a small dog, neglected and sick. He nursed it back to health and much later when the animal died, the self-professed gangster discovered something newborn in him.

GIULIANI: And from that day on, I've been sober, not a drink, not a drug. It gave me a purpose in my life. It gave me a reason to live. FOREMAN: For almost a dozen years now, he's taken in countless lost, abandoned and hurting animals, trying to ultimately find new homes for them and always at very least keeping them safe.

GIULIANI: Every animal that comes here can stay here for their entire life. Until they find the right home.

FOREMAN: The work is time consuming and can be expensive. He helps pay the bills with a dog grooming business called Diamond Collar.

GIULIANI: Diamond collar!

FOREMAN: He doesn't make mobster money anymore.

GIULIANI: Hello, everyone.

FOREMAN: But in many ways, he suggests, he's never felt richer.

GIULIANI: Some people never figure out what their purpose is. I figured it out from a little dog dying on the street.

FOREMAN: Tom Foreman, CNN.


COOPER: Said it before! I'll say it again. I like dogs. That does it for us. Thanks for watching, "PIERS MORGAN LIVE" starts now.