Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Securing the Border; Bernard Madoff Pleads Guilty
Aired March 12, 2009 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Hi, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez.
A lot of news going on right now. The market's up, possibly three days in a row, if it continues this way.
There's been missile strikes in Pakistan. We're going to be telling you all about that.
Oh, and guess what? There has been a raid on a government building in Washington, D.C. We're all over all of those stories, and these as well.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
R. SANCHEZ (voice-over): Will new drug violence along the U.S./Mexico border finally force our government to secure that border? Congress takes that up today. And you will hear it right here.
Would one solution be to take away the drug dealers' incentive? Less killing by them, more money for us. Answers from a Harvard economist.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Every time they find a body, you think, oh, dear.
R. SANCHEZ: Bodies of women keep turning up at a construction site. Two more have been identified. Who killed them? And how many more bodies are out there?
An update on the cable TV war between Jim Cramer and Jon Stewart.
And Senator David Vitter has some explaining to do, after reportedly setting off security alarms at an airport and arguing with a gate agent. We have his explanation. What do you do when you miss a flight?
Can't wait to hear during this national conversation, which begins right here, right now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
R. SANCHEZ: All right, we're going to be mentioning all the aforementioned stories moments ago, that -- what's going on, on Wall Street, for example. We're going to be looking at that number, 199. Are we going to wind up back over 7000? All of that in just a minute.
But, first, let's talk about the story most of America is talking about. Bernie Madoff is in jail. Bernie Madoff will likely die in jail. That's right.
He was in fact pleading guilty on this day in court, said, "I did it" to 11 charges of ripping people off to a tune of $77 billion. Interesting numbers.
Let's go to the video now, if we possibly can. We start with this. This is what he looked like, perhaps for the very last time seeing the light of day before going into prison. He's walking into the federal courthouse there in New York.
Now, I got some other video I want to show you. This is the video of the jail. This is the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Lower Manhattan. That's where he was taken to immediately after pleading guilty.
And now I want you to hear from some of the people who he ripped off, who were in no uncertain terms describing exactly how they felt today to any reporter who would listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bernie Madoff is somebody I just want to get by and put into my past.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Bernie Madoff is some like little maggot that crawled out from under a rock and managed to have a brain enough to do something that injured a number of people. I can't waste time on him.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was retired. I had moved to Florida. I was starting over. And now I have had to move back to New York, move in with a parent, at 52 years old.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The only thing I would like to know -- and, again, I don't think I would believe it -- is who else is involved and where is my money?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm glad to have seen that headline, that in fact he's going directly to jail. I was actually upset that he's been out all of this time.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, he's going to be sentenced for 150 years. I hope he lives a very long life.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
R. SANCHEZ: None of those people had any problems with talking to us today on TV. As a matter of fact, they wanted to get that message out. They have been wanting to get that message out for months now.
Ashleigh Banfield is good enough to join us. She's the host of "In Session" TV, also Kendall Coffey, a former federal prosecutor in Miami. He and I worked many a cases, I don't think any quite like this one, though, in South Florida.
Ash, I want to begin with you.
Is this a death sentence for Bernie Madoff?
ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, TRUTV ANCHOR: Most people think yes. And you have probably heard the number being thrown out there a lot, up to 150 years.
And the reality is, Rick, it's not going to be 150 years. It's not likely that these will all be concurrent sentences -- or rather consecutive sentences, but more likely some concurrency. And there is a lot, by the way, that Bernie Madoff is doing and could be doing to mitigate the numbers of years that the judge will ultimately hand down.
R. SANCHEZ: You know, you almost wonder where he's going to end up going to.
Kendall, let me bring this -- let me bring you into this question, because a lot of people are wondering, is this guy going to wind up one of those country club jails we hear about all the time?
KENDALL COFFEY, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: So many times, the interest of the public sort of drops off after the sentencing.
This time, Rick, I think a lot of the victims are going to want to know where he's staying now that he's going from the penthouse. They want him to be going to the big house. And some of the low- security facilities that some of the Enron-era marquee names are staying in right now -- you remember Bernie Ebbers from WorldCom, John Rigas from Adelphia, may not be grim and bleak enough for -- as far as a lot of these victims are concerned.
R. SANCHEZ: You do wonder, though -- and I don't know which one of you wants to tackle this -- why he went in today and said, I did it, knowing that he's not going to be getting out anytime soon. Why didn't he fight this?
(CROSSTALK)
COFFEY: I think he knew he's heading to effectively a life sentence.
But he also knew he couldn't save himself. And I think he's trying to in effect do damage control for others...
BANFIELD: Yes.
COFFEY: ... to prevent some of the collateral damage to friends and family.
He's hoping that, once the prosecution against Bernie Madoff ends, maybe the case and the investigation of the Bernie Madoff fraud may slow down a little built, may taper off, because there's a lot more people that have explaining to do about this happened.
(CROSSTALK) BANFIELD: I'm going to add to what Kendall is saying. I think there's a lot of that. And then I think there's damage control for his sentence as well, because one of the big golden tickets, when you admit your guilt, and when you take responsibility for your crime, that does work a real magic, you know, formula into getting your sentence reduced.
And that's why I said he's already started the process of trying to make sure those numbers don't stack up so big. But then, also, Rick, what I think he's doing is helping, saying to the public, I'm not costing you a huge trial. You didn't even have to indict this case. I just came forward, admitted the guilt, so no cost to the public.
And then he could help prosecutors to do exactly what Kendall is saying. He could actually help them to get to other people perhaps, maybe not his family, but other people who could have been in the know of this crime and then could be held liable and get some of that restitution money for them. So, there's a few things he might be up to here...
(CROSSTALK)
R. SANCHEZ: Well, I'll tell you what. A lot of people are going to be shaking their heads following this thing. And obviously there are a lot of people today, those who lost their money, who are very happy to see this day come.
My thanks to both of you, Ash and Kendall. We will be talking to you again.
COFFEY: Hey, thanks, Rick.
BANFIELD: You're welcome.
R. SANCHEZ: Our series on Mexico's drug violence has gotten your attention. It's also gotten the attention of the U.S. Congress. I'm going to be joined by the chairwoman of the subcommittee that deals with border issues. They met today. Will they change our drug laws. This is one we all should be checking on.
And, also, checking the market, this could be a third day in a row in positive territory. You're looking at that number right there, 193? Not over 200, but we're over 7000 again. Weren't we there once before? Are you back in the market? Should you be back in the market?
Also, we're now getting these pictures of a raid in a government office in Washington, D.C. That's where it happened. What really happened, though? Who were they going after? Stand by for news.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
R. SANCHEZ: Welcome back.
And, as we expected, many of you have been commenting on this Bernie Madoff story. Let's go right to Facebook.
And there we have got Sam Flowers. He's watching. He says: "Bernie Madoff, you want to start down the road of redemption? Give up your co-conspirators."
And then Henry Bulow is watching, too. He says: "I would like to see an age-progression picture of Madoff to see what he would look like 150 years from now."
Not a bad idea, a little associate producing there by Henry Bulow Rasmussen.
All right, I want you to take a look at something now. This is interesting. You see these two women right there, these two beautiful young Albuquerque women? Their bodies were justified last night.
Now, consider this. Another 11 bodies have been found, and there may even be more of them. Here's what's going on. A person walking through an abandoned construction site has found some remains. And, since then, more bones have turned up. And now police are doing the digging themselves.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAY SCHULTZ, ALBUQUERQUE POLICE CHIEF: To date, we have moved over 24,000 cubic yards of earth.
ROYALE DA, KOAT-TV REPORTER (voice-over): In that earth, crews have found 13 sets of human remains, the latest victims to be identified, Julie Ann (ph) Nieto and Cinnamon Elks. Both went missing in 2004 and both were I.D.ed through dental and medical records.
In these photos, you see detectives in trucks looking for clues far below the service. Chief Ray Schultz says they're making discoveries every day, most of them in a section of the crime scene called the collective remains area.
SCHULTZ: Very often, it may just be a small bone. In some cases, it's nothing other than a single vertebra from a back. Sometimes, it's a little bit more.
DA (on camera): Nine of the 13 sets of remains are close to complete. It's the others that concern investigators.
SCHULTZ: We know that we still have four -- four victims that are still incomplete, and when I say incomplete, not having the entire skeletal remains.
DA (voice-over): That will make finding a positive I.D. difficult. Meanwhile, police are reaching out to dentists.
SCHULTZ: We're asking for the dental community to check their archives, check their basements, check their files to see if they might have anything that would be more current.
DA: Meanwhile, the work here will go on. Chief Schultz says crews won't stop until they stop finding clues in this 100-acre crime scene.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
R. SANCHEZ: We want to thank Royale Da for filing that report for us.
And joining us now is Jeff Proctor. He's a reporter for "The Albuquerque Journal." He's been following this story.
Look, simple question here: Who buried these women?
JEFF PROCTOR, "THE ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL": Rick, I think police are looking at all kinds of different things, everything from a single perpetrator, to two or three people working together, to some kind of gang involvement is what we're hearing now.
R. SANCHEZ: Serial killer?
PROCTOR: They're not going there yet, because cause and manner of death haven't been determined in the case yet. So, because they can't say homicide, they can't say suspect, and they can't say serial killer.
R. SANCHEZ: How many have they identified so far? And who are they?
PROCTOR: They have identified four of the victims so far, girls from their early to late 20s who had struggled with addiction and kind of lived that transient, shadowy lifestyle that also included prostitution, all Albuquerque girls so far.
R. SANCHEZ: I mean, it's fascinating that they would suddenly go into this field, somebody's putting up, you know, some houses, some developer, and they start finding these bones. They all belong to these young, beautiful women whose lives were just ended by someone.
We don't know who it is. And why don't -- why didn't -- weren't these women reported missing the moment that they went missing? And, if not, why not?
PROCTOR: Most were not reported the minute they went looking -- or that they missing. Some up to 13 months after the last time they had been seen were reported missing.
R. SANCHEZ: Wow.
PROCTOR: What police talk about is that, with that lifestyle in particular, a lot of times these sorts of people don't want to be found, which really complicates missing persons investigations.
But the police here did work pretty hard on these cases in the five years that they began noticing this pattern.
R. SANCHEZ: Well, some of our viewers would wonder, can they just go in there and get some kind of forensic evidence, fingerprints, some kind of DNA or something that would immediately help them to solve this case, or have those bodies been there too long for them to be able to do that?
PROCTOR: Well, the I.D. process, so far, they have been lucky with the first four. They had dental records for them.
R. SANCHEZ: But how does that...
(CROSSTALK)
PROCTOR: Mitochondrial DNA...
(CROSSTALK)
R. SANCHEZ: So, yes, exactly, so they got -- so, they know who they are. But how does that lead them to the bad guy who may have done this?
PROCTOR: That's the part the police are keeping pretty close to the vest so far. They haven't told us any other artifacts or evidence that they have found with the bodies...
R. SANCHEZ: Wow.
PROCTOR: ... for fear of, you know, spoiling their investigation. But the chief did tell us yesterday that other evidence has been found with the bodies. They're just not telling us what it is so far.
R. SANCHEZ: What a story. What a story you guys have your hands on there in Albuquerque.
Mr. Proctor, thanks so much, sir, for taking time to join us and take us through that.
PROCTOR: Hey, thank you.
R. SANCHEZ: The violence in Mexico is now getting congressional scrutiny. Is it time to act?
And what about legalizing pot? Seriously.
Also, these pictures coming in now of what is being described as one of the rarest acts of all of Niagara Falls history. Does that man, who went over the falls, actually survive?
And there's the number on Wall Street. It's up. Kick them when they're up. Kick them when they're down. What is it? Oh, look at that. It's at 204. And you see that little thing we do there? That's green, folks. And it's pointing in the right direction. We will be all over it. We will see if it ends up that way. We're, what, 45 minutes away.
Then there's been a missile strike in Pakistan. And we're all over that story for you. Stay with us. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
R. SANCHEZ: All right, I want to show you something now on MySpace. You ready?
"Thirteen bodies" is what it says right there. Boy, we're getting a lot of these now. "Thirteen bodies. I wonder if he or she is still at work killing?"
Good question. Obviously, they don't have the answer to that, because they have no idea who the person might be. But they're certainly not ruling that out, according to all the inquiries that we have made on that story.
By the way, as we do -- as we get going on this next segment, I want to show you what's going on with the market. I know many of you are just tuning us in right now. You may be getting home from work. Is it possible that within the next 40 minutes in this newscast, we will end for the third consecutive day on an up?
Look where it is right now. Remember, we weren't at 7000 before we started this day. We were way under that. And now we're up 206 today. What's going to be said? Does this mean anything?
We just have somebody on Twitter -- and it would be too hard to find her right now -- who actually asked me, does this mean I'm going to be able to get a job again real soon?
It may be a little premature to be answering that question.
I want to show you something else now, somebody who apparently was not happy with what was going on in their lives. They actually decided that they would jump off of Niagara Falls. Here's what's so bizarre about this story. Look at that helicopter. You see the person right there? The person survived.
It's only the third time in history that anyone has survived jumping over the falls. What's even more interesting is that, right after police were able to get to them, they decided they wanted to fight the authorities off. They didn't want to be rescued.
Finally, though, the authorities were able to get them into the helicopter and, then, as a result, they were able to get them out of there and get them to safety.
Wow. What a story. What video. What pictures. We will continue to stay on top of that, as we will many other stories.
And this:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOSEPH BIDEN, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Violent drug- trafficking organizations are threatening both the United States and Mexican communities.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
R. SANCHEZ: The vice president of the United States announcing the nation's new drug czar, but there's a problem, a drug problem involving his son. Or is it a problem? You're going to be able to make that decision.
That was not his son, by the way, but that was a Mexican reporter. He was actually having to duck because there were bullets in the air. Congressman Loretta Sanchez is chairing the committee that deals with the border and the drug issues that have to do with the bullets that reporter was ducking. She's next to take us through what the U.S. government is planning to do about this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
R. SANCHEZ: We posed a question about legalizing marijuana, and, interestingly enough, we're getting a lot of responses. Let's go to the Twitter board, if we can, Robert.
Nofn says: "Those damn hippies just might save our nation," said a scared conservative. "Laugh out loud."
And just under that, Sedojo says: "Legalize marijuana. Stop wasting money on programs that don't work. If you want to control something, you have to regulate it."
Interesting comments. We thank you for those.
All this week, as you know, in a related topic, we have been focusing on the drug violence in Mexico and how it really does, or does not, affect us in the United States. I know I have gotten your attention, because I have been inundated with your e-mails and your tweets and your responses.
Guess who else's attention we got? The U.S. Congress, in the form of the honorable Loretta Sanchez, who chairs the House subcommittee charged with securing the U.S. border.
Congresswoman, thanks so much for being with us.
REP. LORETTA SANCHEZ (D), CALIFORNIA: Thank you, Rick. Always a pleasure to be here.
R. SANCHEZ: I understand that you had a meeting today. What did you learn in that meeting about what is going on and what we may need to be doing about it?
L. SANCHEZ: Well, we have had several classified briefings on what's going on, on the border.
This was a public hearing. It was a hearing not only to educate a broad majority of our congresspeople, but also because it -- there to educate the American public about what really is happening and not happening at the border.
One, we know now that it is a drug fight. It is a fight between cartels. And it's not just about drugs, because, whenever they make a route to ship drugs, they can also ship people. They can do what we call sex trafficking, bringing women over, for example, for that type of business. So, and then what comes south, what is coming south are guns, armaments, and, of course, cash. R. SANCHEZ: Our guns and in many cases our cash.
Let me ask you a question, because we have posed this to a lot of our viewers this week, and we have gotten a lot of responses, pro and con, by the way. Here's one of the big headlines this week. And I think we have got the video of this. I don't know if you saw this, right?
Look at that. Those are coolers. In each of those coolers is a human head. And this is a shocker. It's kind of the tabloid part of the story that makes everybody go, oh, things are out of control down there, which tends to create a knee-jerk response. You know, suddenly, put up a 50-foot wall, send in the Marines, nuke them. I guess you probably heard some of those responses today.
But is that -- is that -- here's the reason I wanted to show that and illustrate it with that shot. Is any of that realistic when solving this problem, really solving it?
L. SANCHEZ: Well, again, one of the things we learned today, that this violence that is going on is really violence within the cartels and against cartels.
So, it really is about dealing with drugs. And, again, these people deal also with money-laundering. Wherever you see drugs, you see all these other illicit activities, movement of people, et cetera. So, it has hit some innocent bystanders, but not to the point where, you know, Americans shouldn't go into Mexico, for example. That was one of the questions.
But back to the basic question, what do we do about the fact that this violence is going on? Certainly these are signs, these are indications to President Calderon of Mexico, in particular. He is cracking down on these cartels. He's going after them. And so they're pushing back and saying -- and trying to put a fear into his police officers, into his army, and into the very government people that are in charge of trying to eliminate this drug trafficking and this people trafficking and really get this crime under control.
So, I guess one would have to say, and it was said in the hearing today, they're doing a better job at it, and that's why they're fighting -- the -- the bad guys are fighting back.
R. SANCHEZ: Congresswoman Sanchez, thanks so much for taking time to join us and letting us know what's going on, what the U.S. response may be. I know you guys are still in your infancy with looking at this, because it's not an old problem.
But do us a favor. Get back to us regularly on this, and we will be checking with you. If there's any news on this, we want to report it right away. And we want to be the first to.
L. SANCHEZ: We will be back. We will be back to talk about -- to the American people about what's going on and what we plan to do.
R. SANCHEZ: Congresswoman Sanchez, thanks so much for being with us. I appreciate it.
L. SANCHEZ: Thank you.
R. SANCHEZ: All right.
You see that building right there? That's a government building in Washington, D.C. It was raided today by the FBI. Why? We will tell you.
Also, that's one of the country's foremost economic minds. No, that's not Bill Maher you're looking at. He's a Harvard professor, and he says legalizing pot may be a good idea.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
R. SANCHEZ: All right. Once again, you heard what Bernanke said yesterday. He said that we would be in some kind of recovery mode by the end of this year, which means that, in 2010, things would start to even out for our economy.
From his mouth to God's ears, obviously. And maybe many people there who invest in the market are seeing it that way or, if nothing else, got a good sense about that and decided to start putting money back in the market.
Either way, what you just saw moments ago was three consecutive days of positive territory in -- on Wall Street. I know the day's not done. We've still got -- I'm looking over here at the clock. We've still got another half hour. We're going to be all over it. And by the end of the hour, we'll actually tell you where this thing is going to end.
And here's something else I want to share with you. The son of the Seattle police chief -- the son of the Seattle police chief once smoked marijuana.
I know, many of you are probably saying yes, Rick, so what?
Well, here's why the arrest of Chief Gil Kerlikowske's son is important. That chief has now been asked to be the nation's new drug policy director by President Obama.
Should the fact that his son smoked marijuana disqualify him?
Or does it make him a more realistic candidate?
It was possession, by the way, the charge, not trafficking or anything like that.
Well, here's what the chief has to say about this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GIL KERLIKOWSKE, DRUG POLICY CHIEF NOMINEE: The nation's drug problem is one of human suffering. And as a police officer, but also in my own family, I have experienced the effects that drugs can have on our youth, our families and our communities.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Jeffrey Miron is a Harvard economics professor and a frequent guest on this program. But we've never had him on -- at least as far as I can recall -- to talk about drugs.
Here's why we're doing this now. He's written a book where he explains what legalizing drugs would save our economy. Are you ready for the number?
$77 billion a year. Hmm. For a comparison, that's the figure that Bernie Madoff admits to bilking investors out of in his Ponzi scheme so they could all be paid back with one quick swoop. Or it's also the two year state budget just passed by the State of Wyoming. That means they run their state with two years for that money.
Professor Miron, thanks so much for being with us, sir.
JEFFREY MIRON, HARVARD UNIVERSITY ECONOMIST: It's nice to be back here.
SANCHEZ: Break it down for us. You know, we got that figure of $77 million from you.
How did you get to $77 -- pardon me -- $77 billion?
MIRON: Well, you would get about $44 billion by not spending the money we're currently spending on police for arrests, on judges and prosecutors for all the trials, for prisons and prison guards, etc. for the incarcerations. And you get another $33 billion or so by collecting tax revenue on legal drugs, in the same way we collect lots of tax revenue on cigarettes and alcohol.
So it's a combination of those two things. And that number puts together the state and the federal. But it gets you what used to be thought of as a big number, although these days it doesn't sound so impressive.
SANCHEZ: No, that's -- not post-Bernie Madoff.
MIRON: No.
SANCHEZ: But, you know, some people would say, you know, we make a lot of money by incarcerating these people. We've got people in prisons and that's -- that's part of the economy, as well.
And would we have to lose the jobs of all these guys who are part of the DEA and police officers fighting on the border?
Why would you want to eliminate those jobs?
MIRON: Well, we don't want to create jobs by forbidding something that people can use responsibly. That argument would say we should go back to criminalizing alcohol and it would say we should criminalize food, because after all, if we made food illegal, there would be billions and billions of people violating the law every day and we could hire zillions of police to enforce those laws. So that's just not a very effective argument.
SANCHEZ: It sounds like...
MIRON: Of course...
SANCHEZ: It sounds like what you're saying is that we are almost at the same place today where we were back during Prohibition -- that we've got a problem and the best way of solving it would be of getting rid of the prohibition, vis-a-vis alcohol.
MIRON: Absolutely. And, of course, it turns out that one of the reasons that the nation came to its senses in 1933 was because of a big economic downturn, the Great Depression. And they realized that they wanted more tax revenue and legalizing alcohol again was one way to do it.
Now, that's not the only reason to legalize. It's much more important that legalization would, for example, get rid of all the violence in Mexico that we've been observing recently.
SANCHEZ: You know, it's interesting, Kerlikowske, that potential drug czar that we were just showing there, he's one of the -- he's one of the few police chiefs who's actually tried to not decriminalize it legally, but make it so that it's like, you know, maybe a slap on the wrist.
Yesterday, on the other hand, we were doing a story about folks in Texas who were putting people in jails for a long time for just having paraphernalia -- a pipe, not even the actual substance itself -- in their car.
So on one side of the country we have the law being treated one way. On another side of the country, we've got the law being treated completely differently. It's like a piecemeal approach.
Is that part of the problem?
MIRON: Well, that's a part of the problem. But I think there's a more fundamental problem, which is that the law just doesn't make sense. If it's something that is potentially dangerous, there might be a reason to regulate it. There might be a reason to tax it. That's exactly what we do with alcohol and cigarettes. But we leave them as legal goods because that way we avoid having the underground markets that create corruption, that create violence, that redistribute income to criminals and a whole set of negative ancillary effects.
SANCHEZ: Fascinating.
What kind of reaction -- I mean, you're a Harvard professor. You're not supposed to be writing about stuff like this. I mean people are going to think you're a stoner or something.
I mean what kind of reaction have you gotten from this?
And do you think it will ever fly?
MIRON: From economists, I get a lot of very positive response. Economists think about unintended consequences and recognize that a lot of these negative effects we attribute to drugs are due to drug prohibition.
Politicians don't want to touch it because it doesn't seem to be politically viable right now.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
MIRON: And that's the problem.
SANCHEZ: That's interesting. Man, I'll tell you what, an interesting discussion. I'm glad we did this.
Professor, thank you for being with us, sir.
MIRON: My pleasure.
Thank you.
SANCHEZ: There is new information on the teenage gunman who massacred 15 people in Germany. He was online the night before. He told somebody exactly what he was going to do.
But why didn't that person tell the authorities?
And then I'm going to tell you what a senator says really happened when he was running late for a commercial flight and he set off a security alarm. Uh-oh.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Boy, we're getting a lot of response, as you might expect, after talking to a Harvard economist about legalizing marijuana. It's all over the place.
As a matter of fact, let's start with Facebook.
You ready?
"Jeffrey Miron is the man," says Robert Noel. "He is correct with his ideas. They make a lot of sense, which Washington does not have."
Lisa is watching. She says: "Well said, Jeff Miron. I agree."
Suddenly, it sounds like the guy is a superstar.
Let's go over to Twitter. And there we'll see a couple of other comments: "California law enforcement really seems to have bigger fish to fry than busting pot users."
And the next one says: "This country needs to legalize marijuana and hemp products. Our economic security depends on it."
Interesting feedback.
By the way, Angie, my executive producer, was telling me that we've also gotten a lot of responses from people who say they don't agree, by the way. But it does look -- at least for now, and we'll continue counting -- that the consensus seems to go the other way.
And I want to tell you something else, something new that we've learned about.
Remember that teenager I told you about yesterday who walked into his old school and shot 15 people?
And if you have kids, I especially want you to pay attention to what I am about to say. This is really important. The night before those killings in Germany the gunman, a 17-year-old, was chatting online with another teenager. That's not surprising. It's what he says that's news. He said: "I'm fed up with this bloody life." And then he went on to describe what he was going to do and the weapon he would use to do it. And then he did it.
Here's the problem. The boy on the other end of the line -- the other end of the online conversation here in the United States, he didn't think that Tim Kretschmer was serious. His reply was akin to LOL -- you know, laughing out loud.
Well, the online conversation is now being examined by authorities. Just think about it.
Wouldn't it be great if that was being used to prevent the crime rather than now do a postmortem, literally, on it?
It's something for all of us to really take note of. And maybe more importantly, something for our kids to take note of -- something we may want to talk to kids about when they're online and they hear that kind of thing from a friend.
When will the war between Jim Cramer and Jon Stewart finally end?
That's another story we've been looking into all week long. And oh, there's a development.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right, once again, we have been getting information about what is described as very serious missile attack, once again, in Pakistan. We're going to share that information with you.
I'm reading here -- this is a CNN wire that was just put out moments ago. It's a U.S. missile strike. It's killed 11 people Thursday. It happened in Northwest Pakistan.
We're being told now that six others were wounded. And the missiles are believed to have been shot by a drone, which would indicate it was the U.S. military going into that region, again, which is, by the way, in case you haven't followed the story, as we've been telling it to you, causing conflict within Pakistan between the Islamists in the Waziristan region and some of the valleys that we've been telling you about and those in the government, as well, and the United States, who has been saying we need to go after the Taliban and even lately, remnants of Al Qaeda that have been showing off on that border and Afghanistan.
It's a complicated story, but important, nonetheless, given in light of this development that I shared with you just moments ago and one we'll continue to stay on top of.
Meanwhile, I want to show you something else now. It's another story that we've been following this week. In fact, we were one of the first to show you this video after we saw it. And since then, we thought it was over, but it's not. It's this relative feud, if you will, between Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" and Jim Cramer of CNBC. It continues.
Here's Jim Acosta.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "MAD MONEY," COURTESY CNBC)
JIM CRAMER, HOST, CNBC'S "MAD MONEY": You know, I don't want to stick my neck out anymore because it seems to get chopped off every single night around 11:00.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIM ACOSTA, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The war of words has gotten personal. In one corner, CNBC's "Mad Money" host Jim Cramer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "TODAY," COURTESY NBC)
CRAMER: A comedian is attacking me. Wow!
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, he's "The Daily Show." I mean...
CRAMER: He runs a variety show.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ACOSTA: In the other corner, "The Daily Show's" Jon Stewart...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART," COURTESY COMEDY CENTRAL)
JON STEWART, HOST: And variety show?
What?
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: That makes it sound like I'm some kind of buffoon.
(END VIDEO CLIP) ACOSTA: ...who spent the last week lampooning Cramer's bad stock calls.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM 2006, COURTESY THESTREET.COM/YOUTUBE.COM)
CRAMER: It's a fun game and it's a lucrative game.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ACOSTA: But this video, made in 2006 has suddenly gone viral -- and it's no joke.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM 2006, COURTESY THESTREET.COM/YOUTUBE.COM)
CRAMER: Go in and take a bunch of stocks and make sure that they are -- they're higher. And maybe commit $5 million in capital and do it and that could affect it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ACOSTA: Cramer explains to his own financial Web site, TheStreet.com, how he could influence stock prices up and down as the manager of a massive hedge fund.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM 2006, COURTESY THESTREET.COM/YOUTUBE.COM)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And, by the way, no one else in the world would ever admit that, but I think you care.
CRAMER: That's right. And you can say that here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I can because I'm not going to say it on TV.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ACOSTA: Largely unregulated, hedge funds were attractive to wealthy investors and at their peak may have controlled more than $2 trillion in assets.
TOM DAVIS, FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Well, I think he's become a poster child for why hedge funds need more regulation and transparency.
ACOSTA: Tom Davis, a former top Republican on the House committee that investigated hedge funds last fall, says Cramer's comments in the video show the need for reform in the markets.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM 2006, COURTESY THESTREET.COM/YOUTUBE.COM)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now, is any of this illegal?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DAVIS: It wasn't, but it should be. He may well have crossed the line. I think that's something somebody ought to be looking at. I think the tragedy is over the last few years, nobody's been looking at this at all.
ACOSTA: Cramer issued this statement to CNN: "No one knows and respects the securities laws more than I do. I didn't go to Harvard Law School for nothing. When I was a hedge fund trader in the 1990s, I played fair and I did nothing that violated those laws."
The "Mad Money" host will have a chance to explain himself in a scheduled showdown with Stewart tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART," COURTESY COMEDY CENTRAL)
STEWART: The annoying guy with the money show. I don't know. He'll be here tomorrow in this studio.
ACOSTA (on camera): A spokesman for CNBC declined to comment on the Web video, noting that it first became public in 2007. Cramer does have his legions of fans, who say the tips from the "Mad Money" host have boosted their portfolios. But over the years, Cramer concedes he's made some bad calls.
Jim Acosta, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: We told you at the beginning of the newscast, we'd be following a couple of the stories. And maybe one of the biggest stories is the fact that for the third day in the row, the market is in positive territory. It's important. And we were wondering if we were going to finish in positive territory. It's starting to look like we are, folks. Look at that. It's, what, 249 -- 250, going up as we speak. That's a good thing.
What have we got, about another 12 minutes left in the day?
We'll be checking on it and telling you how it closes.
Did it have something to do with Bernanke's comments yesterday?
We'll look into that, as well.
Let's go over here to MySpace, if we possibly can. I want to get you guys involved in the show. That's why those big plasmas are there. Let's go in tight on one of them. It says -- this is interesting. It's about the story we did about legalizing marijuana: "A pack of weedies next to a pack of Reds or Camels -- LOL -- would be interesting. How would big tobacco market to kids?"
There's a bit of a troubling question: "Michael Phelps could be the new Joe Camel."
Hmm. Something to think about.
All right. Let's get back to this.
You know the big doors behind the check-in counter at the airport?
Senator David Vitter this week tried to open one of those after missing his flight.
You know you're not supposed to do that, right, Senator?
Well, the senator now has an explanation. And he's not the only lawmaker, by the way, who's considered -- consider themselves a little bit above the rest of us when it comes to getting in and out of planes.
We'll take you through it.
Stay there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: If you fly at all in this country, you know the drill at the airport, right?
You have to be there early, go through security and show up at your gate on time.
And if you don't, that jet way door slams shut, right?
You missed your flight. Sorry. Too bad. It's federal law, no matter who you are.
Well, Senator David Vitter didn't make it in time for one of his flights out of Washington. He tried to actually open that secure door. And that set off alarms. And, oh, yes, then there was a witness there who said he got into an argument with a United Airlines employee.
They say -- quote -- say that he screamed: "Don't you know who I am?"
We asked the senator's office what really happened. Here's their response: "After being delayed on the Senate floor ensuring a vote on my anti-pay raise amendment and in a rush to make my flight home for town hall meetings the next day, I accidentally went through a wrong door at the gate. I did have a conversation with an airline employee, but it was certainly not like this silly gossip column made it out to be," said Vitter.
We thank the senator for his response.
I should add, by the way, that Senator Vitter's office wanted us to also know why we weren't mentioning Chuck Schumer, who asked for special treatment at LaGuardia in January. Apparently he did get his plane to take off 16 minutes early so that he could make it in time for a meeting back in Washington. So there you go, Senator. You wanted us to mention it. We checked it out and we just mentioned it.
Patricia Murphy is good enough to join us now to take us through this conversation. You know, it's one of those stories that has people scratching their heads and thinking, but I get it. Michael, my producer, for -- while you and I were filing stories for Anderson Cooper's show, we barely got planes half the time. I know what it -- we know what it's like.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely. I've been through it many times.
SANCHEZ: They -- they close the door and sometimes you get mad.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, yes.
SANCHEZ: And you want...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can relate.
SANCHEZ: You want to argue with the lady, but you can't open the door, right, Murph?
You can't open that door.
PATRICIA MURPHY, EDITOR, CITIZENJANEPOLITICS.COM: You cannot open that door. That is actually a violation of federal law. And this incident has actually become a little bit more serious because the Transportation Security Administration says they're now investigating the incident.
And I would like to point out, Senator Vitter is a member of the Senate's own Aviation Safety and Security Subcommittee. So he knows the rules.
SANCHEZ: Well, but wait a minute. He's saying in his explanation that he accidentally -- look, I don't want to beat up on the guy. I've lost my head and I've done a lot of dumb things in my life. And this may have just been a dumb thing. But he says he accidentally opened the door. You've got to know what that door is. It's not like it's his first time flying, right?
MURPHY: Yes, well, you know, it's happened to everybody. You can still see the plane just sitting there and you just want to get on. And he was told, apparently, that the flight was closed. And then he said he accidentally opened the wrong door.
We don't know what that means. "Roll Call" says it has one witness to the incident. So we don't know exactly what happened. But the TSA probably will know what happened. There are always lots of video cameras around all of these gates. So if that surfaces, we'll have our answer, for sure.
SANCHEZ: It's a tough situation. You kind of...
MURPHY: It is.
SANCHEZ: You know, if you fly, you feel bad for the senator. And you want to go home and you want to be with your family. By the way, we're getting a lot of action on this. Look at -- look at this on Facebook already. Daniel is watching. He says: "Hey, at least Senator Vitter is not flying on a private plane."
That's right.
Also, Lisa is watching. She says: "I have a solution -- make Vitter work as a gate agent for a week instead and then stand back and watch that" -- (LAUGHTER) "watch that meltdown."
I'll bet you that's a gate agent who's actually telling us that.
Thanks, Murph.
MURPHY: Thanks.
SANCHEZ: I want to bring Wolf Blitzer in to us now -- hey Wolf, there was a big buzz today in your town there, Washington, D.C. about a building that was raided by the FBI. We're trying to get a handle on what this was and does it in any way affect the administration of President Barack Obama?
WOLF BLITZER, HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": It's -- so many of those questions are unanswered right now. I assume in the next few hours, at least in the next few days, we're going to begin getting answers, Rick. But they're -- you're absolutely right, there is a big buzz and there's a lot of questions.
When they went into this Office of Technology, what was the target of the probe, if you will?
But I don't have those answers right now. But we'll get them.
SANCHEZ: You know what's interesting is this is is somebody who had been nominated by the president to handle an office. But I guess the information -- and to be fair to him -- to be very fair at this point, just because they raided his office doesn't mean he's the target, correct?
BLITZER: Absolutely right, because they could have been looking for information from a previous occupant of that office or they could have been looking for information unrelated to the office itself, but maybe there's something pertinent to another investigation that's going on.
So these are good questions, but we don't have the answers.
SANCHEZ: That's great. Well, I know you guys are going to be looking at some of that stuff during your newscast.
What else you got coming our way?
BLITZER: We're going to be waiting. The president of the United States is about to take questions from the Business Roundtable, these top business leaders, over at the White House. We're going to carry that live.
And later, the first lady is now meeting with military forces. And we're going to hear her live, as well. All that coming up in the next hour right here in THE SITUATION ROOM -- Rick.
SANCHEZ: Wolf Blitzer, thanks so much.
We'll look forward to it.
The best political show on cable, "THE SITUATION ROOM".
Thank you.
Here's what we have coming back. The question is pretty simple. We've been getting a bevy of responses from you. So let me just ask you -- and I'll be writing it right here on this keyboard in just a moment.
It's very simple, once again, and it goes like this -- should marijuana be legalized? I'm asking now. You've got two minutes to respond. Your viewership -- your viewer response, when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Just a couple of quick comments before we do anything else. I want to show you some of the comments that you guys have -- I asked you a question and you answered: "No, don't legalize pot. Right now it's potent everywhere. Legalizing will make it weak and overpriced, like U.S. beer."
There's a response we didn't expect.
Also: "Rick, legalizing marijuana would be very interesting for the economy, but what kind of message would that send to the kids?"
And then over here on MySpace: "Alcohol was illegal. The government buckled for the same reasons you're asking them to buckle now. One dangerous vice is more than enough."
Susan Lisovicz is standing by now.
She's on Wall Street, where the market is up for if third consecutive day.
What's going on -- Susan?
LISOVICZ: We got a nice rally. We've earned it. The Dow up 600 points in three days, or 9 percent. Whether it's a three day wonder, a big bear trap, we'll have the answers tomorrow. We'll see if this trend will continue.
See you then.
SANCHEZ: A dead cat bounce or a bear trap?
Oh my god, here we go.
Wolf Blitzer is starting us off now in "THE SITUATION ROOM".
Take it away -- Wolf. BLITZER: Thanks very much, Rick.
