Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

New Army Secretary Nominee; Sotomayor Meets the Senators; Plane Wreckage Found; Roeder Had a History of Dissidence; Leahy Discusses Sotomayor Meeting; The Help Desk

Aired June 02, 2009 - 11:57   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I have no greater responsibility than the security of the American people. And keeping the American people safe demands keeping our armed forces strong. The soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsman who bear the burden of America's defense.

Few have borne a heavier burden in recent years than America's Army. The soldiers, active, Guard and reserve, who have deployed multiple times to Afghanistan and Iraq. The thousands who have given life or limb or our wounded warriors like those I'll be visiting this week in Germany. The spouses and children. The heroes back home like those my wife, Michelle, has visited at Fort Bragg and around the country. And the veterans we honor still, like the heroes of D-day, who we'll remember this week in Normandy.

As a nation, we have a sacred trust with all those who wear the uniform to always take care of them as they take care of us. That's why my administration is increasing funding for our military, including the Army, and increasing the size of the Army two years ahead of schedule. That's why we're investing in the equipment our forces need today, including the additional Army helicopters and crews urgently needed in Afghanistan.

That's why we're investing in the new capabilities demanded by 21st-century missions, and that's why we're increasing support to soldiers and families -- increasing pay, investing $1.7 million in Army family programs and making historic investments to improve care for our wounded warriors and veterans.

And today, I'm proud to introduce the distinguished public servant who will help keep us safe and keep our sacred trust with our soldiers and their families. The next secretary of the Army, the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, John McHugh. For more than 30 years of public service at local, state and national level, John has proven himself a dedicated representative of the people of northern New York.

But it is his service over the past 16 years in Congress as a champion of our men and women in uniform that uniquely qualifies him to help lead America's Army. John understands personally and deeply the sacrifices that our soldiers and their families make every day. Just ask the soldiers he's always fought for in his district at Fort Drum, home to the legendary 10th Mountain Division, the most deployed division in the U.S. Army. Or ask the soldiers he's visited on his many trips to Iraq and Afghanistan. John is committed to keeping America's Army the best trained, the best equipped, the best-led land force the world has ever seen. He's been a member of the Armed Services Committee for 16 years. He has been a co-chair of the House Army Caucus for 14 years. He served as ranking member of the military personnel subcommittee.

As secretary of the Army, he will ensure that our soldiers are trained and equipped to meet the full spectrum of challenges and threats of our time, the conventional and unconventional, the nation state and the terrorist network.

John understands that confronting these challenges also requires something else. He served on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and three of its key subcommittees. He knows that when we send our forces into harm's way, they need the best, most accurate intelligence to protect our soldiers and advance our interests.

At the same time, John knows that we must reform the way the Pentagon and the Army does business. Along with Senators Carl Levin and John McCain and Representative Ike Skelton, he played a role in passing the landmark Weapons Systems Acquisitions Reform Act, which I signed into law two weeks ago. As secretary, he will help lead our efforts to save taxpayers billions of dollar and equip our soldiers with the weapons they need on time and on budget.

Most importantly, John understands that the Army's greatest strength is its people. He served for many years on the Board of Visitors of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. He's been honored by our soldiers and their families for his efforts to increase the readiness, health care and quality of life. As secretary, he will ensure that America keeps faith with our soldiers, increasing their pay, increasing child care, and helping families deal with the stress and strain of war.

Finally, John shares my belief that a sustainable national security strategy must include a bipartisan consensus at home. He hasn't agreed with every decision my administration has made, but he brings patriotism and a pragmatism that has won him respect on both sides of the aisle.

I should note that this patriotism runs in the McHugh family. During World War II, John's father served with distinction on a B-17 bomber. His mother cared for wounded GIs through the Nurses Corps.

I know giving up his seat in Congress after nine terms will require a sacrifice both for John and his constituents, but I also know that he's more than ready to carry on his family's tradition of service and to write the next great chapter of his own service to his country. And I know that the Army and America will be stronger for it.

With that, I would like to invite John to say a few words.

REP. JOHN MCHUGH (R), NEW YORK: Thank you, Mr. President. I thought long and hard as to what I might say that would sound original at this moment, but honestly, I don't have an original thought in my mind. All I know is what I feel in my heart, and that is that I am enormously moved and deeply proud of this nomination.

And Mr. President, I want to say to you both thank you, sir, for the opportunity and for the distinguished honor you have extended to me through this nomination, and to promise you that if confirmed by the Senate, I will do everything I be possibly can to work in concert with the Army leadership, to provide you and to Secretary Gates the broadest based, the most accurate, the most informative information as you go forward in discharging your very, very weighty responsibilities in these dangerous times as commander in chief.

And Mr. President, let me thank you very briefly for your very gracious and kind comments about my family and about my affinity for the United States Army.

My dad has been gone from us now for 19 years, and yet not a day passes we don't miss him, not a day passes when he is unable to bring a smile to our faces or a tear to our eye. And we love him dearly.

My brother, my best friend, I've always thanked him for taking the bottom bunk in the one-bedroom we grew up together, but most of all for having the good sense to marry my sister that I never had, his beautiful bride, Marty (ph), and for giving us, as they both did, the apples of all of our eyes, my nephew and niece, their son and daughter, P.J. (ph) and Mikaila (ph). Most of all my mom, who, through all of these years after having brought us into the world, still finds a way to help us take that next step in a very difficult world.

As to the United States Army, for the last, as the president rightly said, 16 years, I've been a proud member of the Armed Services Committee. It is an amazing committee. In my humble judgment, the most productive, the most responsible and, frankly, the most fun committee to serve on because of the challenges we face. But we're like everybody other committee.

When we walk in the door, we have our political differences, we have our political divides and opinions. And we don't always check them at that door. But at the end of the day, and every year of my experience, Republicans and Democrats alike have put aside those differences and worked for the most important common good. That is the welfare, the interests of the men and women who voluntarily put on a uniform of the branches of the United States military, and their families, because they serve as well.

And President Obama has put that priority at the top of his considerations as well, and I don't just commend him for it, I thank him deeply for that path forward.

I would simply say that for all of the special feelings we have for all of the military, I've always had the Army somewhat apart. I grew up in the shadows of Fort Drum. For the last 20 years, I've worked in concert with those men and women of the communities around that great facility in support of the men and women of the 10th Mountain Division. As the president so graciously noted my service on the Army Caucus and the Board of Visitors at West Point. The Army has always had a special place in my heart.

And Mr. President, that's why I so deeply appreciate this nomination.

In the days ahead, I looked forward to working with the Senate as they discharge their constitutional authorities and obligations in considering this nomination. But I want to make one final point if I may.

I feel very blessed today. I am blessed today. But the fact of the matter is, nothing more than the latest in a growing line of individuals of many different backgrounds, many different life experiences, as my nomination suggests, differing political persuasions who have been provided by President Obama the chance to heed, to answer new, important, and challenging problems facing this country.

Mr. President, for the opportunity to be in that long and growing and proud line, I thank you and I hope never to let you down.

OBAMA: Thank you so much.

TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: President Obama picks a new Army secretary. He nominates a Republican congressman for the post.

CNN's Elaine Quijano live from the White House with details.

And Elaine, we heard a little bit about John McHugh's background. What else can you tell us about him?

ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, just to recap, Congressman John McHugh is a nine-term Republican lawmaker from upstate New York, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee. He is well versed, certainly, as we heard President Obama say, in issues that affect military personnel and their families. As the president noted, McHugh actually has experience as chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, so he's very familiar with issues like medical care and pay bonuses.

So, what the president is really doing here with this pick is trying to send a message to military personnel and their families that, "Look, I am serious when I say that I am committed to addressing your concerns." But it's interesting. As we heard the last part of McHugh's remarks there, he's also sending a message about bipartisanship as well, saying that, essentially, "Look, I am serious when I say I am open to all viewpoints here when it comes to solving some of the difficult problems facing the nation, including some of the problems facing the military" -- Tony.

HARRIS: Hey, Elaine, a couple of other questions here. If he is confirmed, McHugh would join the ranks of other Republicans in top positions in this administration. Remind us of some of those other picks. QUIJANO: Yes. Well, of course, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, we know, is a holdover from the Bush administration. But also, you have the transportation secretary from Illinois, Ray LaHood. And also interesting to note as well, that Congressman McHugh is someone who, while he has in fact agreed with President Obama on some things, has not always necessarily seen eye to eye on issues either. We should also mention that President Obama also late last month named Utah Republican Governor John Huntsman as ambassador to China.

But again, really the message here from the Obama administration -- and we heard it from the nominee himself -- that this is an administration that is very much committed to reaching across the aisle, to reaching out for different viewpoints, as the administration moves forward here. But keep in mind also, President Obama is trying to push ahead his budget spending plans, which, as you know, have not really been received very well by Republicans in Congress, so this could perhaps be an effort to try and help on that front as well. So, that is the selection by the Obama administration, the calculation if you will.

And also, just really quickly, on a political note, interesting that Congressman McHugh -- we mentioned nine-term congressman -- he also -- this tells you how popular he was. Also a very popular lawmaker in his district. He won reelection last year with 65 percent of the vote.

HARRIS: Wow.

QUIJANO: Sixty-five percent of the vote. So we're talking about an extremely popular politician, in addition to someone who, again, understands the issues facing the military and their families -- Tony.

HARRIS: Who's that popular these days?

All right. At the White House, Elaine Quijano for us.

Elaine, thank you.

You know, it is a day of meeting and greeting for President Obama's Supreme Court nominee. Judge Sonia Sotomayor making the rounds on Capitol Hill, meeting the senators who will vote on her nomination.

Senior Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash is with us again, following Sotomayor's every move. She joins us now with an update.

And Dana, where is the judge right now? Do we know?

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: She's in the building where I am, in the Russell Office Building in the Capitol complex. She is still meeting with the Senate Judiciary chairman, Patrick Leahy, and we expect that meeting probably to be wrapping up in the next maybe 10 or 15 minutes. And we do expect to hear from the Judiciary chairman about their meeting, about what they talked about, perhaps. He was very clear going into it when I talked to him that it was a private meeting and he wouldn't be talking a lot about the kinds of questions he asked. But he is a very important figure, obviously, in her fate. And in particular, in the schedule and timetable of her fate and what the White House wants to do. So we'll be able to ask him some of the questions like that when he has his press conference.

Of course, this was the second meeting that she had. Her first meeting of the day, Tony, was with the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid. And it was -- just in terms of the sources we talked to who are familiar with that meeting with the Senate majority leader, it was interesting in that, from our understanding, there wasn't a lot of heavy probing. Obviously, he's a like-minded Democrat, he's somebody who obviously agrees with the president wholeheartedly in his choice of Sonia Sotomayor.

But they did talk about the fact that they have similar stories and that they both come from very humble roots. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had quite a poor childhood and came up from his bootstraps, and he made clear to the judge that he admired that she did something very similar.

Also, very interesting, Tony, you know, this is just the beginning of a very long day for the judge here. And what the Senate Democratic leader did in that meeting, I am told by Democratic sources, is he tried to give her a little bit of the lay of the land, give her some advice as to what she could be dealing with in terms of the personalities and the approach of various senators she's going to be meeting with. So, he tried to kind of grease the skids, if you will, for her in a long day here.

HARRIS: Hey, Dana, I want to get to the reporting you did for us last hour, because I think it's fascinating. Senator Dianne Feinstein absolutely intends to put something on the record here in her conversation with the judge.

Now, we're all -- well, most of us are familiar with the statement from the judge back in 2001, this statement that some described as being racist. Here it is: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

As I mentioned, some have described that statement as being racist, and the senator is going to ask the judge for some clarity on that statement. Correct?

BASH: That's correct. That's exactly what the senator told us when we were talking to her in the hallway just a few minutes ago.

And just to be clear, the senator, Senator Dianne Feinstein, who, of course, is a Democrat, said that she thinks that it is repugnant to call her a racist. And she was very angry that Republicans outside of the Senate have used that term.

But she also said that she does think it's important to kind of clear the air, from her perspective, and get it in proper context. So, I think it might be a little bit counterintuitive, because we do expect Republicans who have seized on that comment -- certainly Republicans in the Senate haven't called her a racist, but seized on that comment, put questions out there about that comment, what does it mean in terms of her approach to the bench and her approach to whether she's an activist judge. So, we do expect Republicans to potentially ask about that, but this is a Democrat who says that, you know, just in terms of the future and the way this is going to go, she thinks that -- Senator Feinstein thinks it's important for her to use her one-on-one meeting with the judge to clear the air.

HARRIS: Yes. And we expect to learn, don't we, Dana, what the judge says to the senator in response to the question?

BASH: We hope so. Senator Feinstein told us that she was going to come out and talk to us afterwards. And since she was pretty open about what she intends to ask her about, hopefully she will be open about the response that she got from the judge. Because also, just remember, the politics going on here as well.

On Friday, it was the Obama White House. In fact, it was President Obama himself who put out there that maybe she didn't use the right terminology or the right phrase in her 2001 speech at Berkeley when she said that as a Latina, that maybe she could make better decisions than a white male. So, Democrats understand that it is in their best interest politically and in terms of setting the tone and the tenor to, early on, try to put this in better context, and these meetings provide an opportunity for that.

HARRIS: I can't wait. I can't wait to hear it. And let's get it on the record.

All right. Our Senior Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash for us.

Dana, thank you.

BASH: Thank you.

HARRIS: Another reminder. We are expecting remarks shortly from Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, although I believe Dana just mentioned that the meeting is still going on with Judge Sotomayor. Leahy, as you know, is chairman of the committee that will hold hearings on Sotomayor's confirmation.

We will bring you his comments live here in the NEWSROOM.

Relatives waiting for word from Rio as search crews look for a Paris-bound Air France jet that vanished over the Atlantic while flying into thunderstorms. How families of the missing are coping today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: Now to this developing story in that tragic Air France plane mystery. Searchers believe they may have found the debris from the flight that disappeared from the radar Sunday night. Two hundred and twenty-eight passengers and crew were on board and are presumed dead, including an American couple.

John Zarrella joins us live from Rio de Janeiro with details on the latest discovery.

John, what can you tell us?

JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Tony, what we have heard is that the Brazilian Navy, first thing early this morning, at about 6:00 a.m., with a C-130 aircraft and some other aircraft flying out in the Atlantic about 400 miles off of a chain of islands on the northeast coast of Brazil, spotted what they believe to be debris from an airplane. They found or noticed on the surface of the water what looked like an orange life vest, a drum, a metal drum, and what appeared to be an oil slick, along with some other metal objects floating on the surface.

But, of course, they were flying in those airplanes, and impossible at this point to determine if that is in fact the debris from Flight 447. But they have three commercial vessels that were in the area, two from the Netherlands and one from France. And those vessels had been dispatched to the location where the debris was spotted.

We have just been told a little while ago that the French vessel is at the scene. We do not have any information at this point as to what, if anything, they have found out there.

A navy ship from the Brazilian Navy is also on its way there but is not expected in that area for at least another 12 to 24 hours. Not getting there until sometime tomorrow.

The first order of business, the Brazilian Navy told these commercial vessels, is look for possible survivors, if there's anybody out there. The water temperature is warm. The sea surface conditions are pretty good, we are told from the Brazilian Navy. So, if anybody is in the water and survived, they have a good chance of surviving -- Tony.

HARRIS: Hey, John, just another quick one. Are the reports true that there was another flight in the air at approximately the same time the Air France plane would have been in the air, and that the flight crew of that other flight may actually have seen something that may very well be part of the Air France plane, the fuselage?

ZARRELLA: Well, there was a Brazilian airliner, a TAM airliner, that supposedly the flight crew spotted things on the water. That may have been closer to Senegal, is what we're told, closer to Africa. And they did search that area as well but did not find anything there.

And one other thing, Tony. The Ministry of Defense is supposed to be meeting with families, probably briefing them on these latest developments, and the families are staying at a hotel about 10 minutes from where we are here -- Tony.

HARRIS: OK. John Zarrella for us in Rio de Janeiro.

And John, appreciate it. Thank you.

Some more details on the American couple on that flight.

Anne and Michael Harris moved from Texas to Brazil a few months ago. Michael was 60 years old. His wife was 54.

Michael was a geologist. The couple, originally from Louisiana, was headed to Paris from Rio for a training seminar and for a vacation.

People from more than 30 nations were aboard that plane. Police are studying passenger lists and maintenance records. They're preparing to take DNA from relatives to help identify the bodies.

A murder suspect's chilling task. What we are learning about the man accused of gunning down a Kansas abortion provider.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: The man accused of shooting an abortion provider to death is due in a Kansas Court in just a few hours. His name, Scott Roeder.

As CNN's Ed Lavandera tells us, some who know him say they're not surprised.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please take some information.

ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For years, Roeder was a regular at abortion protests like this one. And CNN has learned that the day before Dr. Tiller was killed, a worker at a clinic in Kansas City says Roeder was chased off after trying to glue the locks shot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He hit us in 2000 with the same thing. He's a regular at our clinic. I know him by face.

LAVANDERA: It's a cause that his ex-wife, who didn't want to show her face, says Roeder had grown obsessed with.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He was determined that if the abortion doctor killed the baby, then he didn't have any right to live either. It was justifiable.

LAVANDERA: She says he had made plans before. Police arrested Roeder in 1996 after finding explosives in his car. His ex-wife says he intended to blow up an abortion clinic.

At the time, police said he also had links to the Freemen, an anti-government group out of Montana. At his sentencing the judge called him a threat to the community and scolded him for trying to live by his own laws. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Citizens must conform their conduct to what's been written in the law, not what freedoms they choose for themselves.

LAVANDERA: Roeder spent 16 months in prison and eight months on probation before the conviction was thrown out on appeal.

Roeder's family says he has a long history of mental illness, and his ex-wife described him as self-righteous and capable of murder.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think I knew that if he snapped, if he went that far, that he could actually do it.

LAVANDERA: She described a man who put his beliefs among all else, even once spending family money on a gun instead of heart medicine for her.

An old landlord said Roeder's views seemed extreme.

BRANDON DOCKINS, ROEDER'S FORMER LANDLORD: I've been exposed to a lot of different religions, but I've never been exposed to the point of view that was so full of hate.

LAVANDERA: Two years ago, someone using Roeder's name posted a threatening message on the Web site of the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue. It said, "Bless everyone for attending and praying to bring justice to Tiller and closing of the death camp," he wrote. And he also asked, "Sometime soon, would it be feasible to organize as many people as possible to attend Tiller's church (inside, not just outside)..."

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LAVANDERA: And Tony, a court hearing is expected later on this afternoon. Not exactly clear yet if formal charges will be filed today, but that could happen. So we'll be on the lookout for that.

But one interesting note. Friday night, Roeder's ex-wife says that he insisted on spending time with their 22-year-old son, which is a little bit out of the ordinary. Apparently, Roeder is a strict observer of the Sabbath, so doing this on a Friday night would have been out of the norm for him. But he insisted on taking his son to go see the "Stark Trek" movie, and to dinner, and get some ice-cream. The family, looking back on that now, believes it was his way of saying good-bye.

HARRIS: Yes.

CNN's Ed Lavandera for us in Wichita, Kansas.

Ed, appreciate it. Thank you.

As GM workers worry about their jobs, what does the bankruptcy mean for dealerships and folks looking to buy cars? That story coming up in just a couple of moments.

But right now, let's get you to Senator Patrick Leahy on Capitol Hill.

(JOINED IN PROGRESS)

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D), VERMONT: ... so I was delighted to see her again.

The judge and I have known each other for years. She is on the 2nd Circuit, which is the circuit I'm admitted to and one I've argued a number of cases, before the 2nd Circuit. And I was -- I've watched her in there, watched her as a district judge and as a 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals judge.

She makes me think of Justice Souter, somebody with a great legal mind, impeccable credentials. She's -- if she's confirmed, she'll be the only member of the court with experience as a trial court judge, which I think is extremely important, because you have a different perspective than an appellate court judge, than as a trial court judge. Also, from a personal point of view, I'm always glad to see someone who served as a prosecutor.

I think if you served as a prosecutor, you've been in law enforcement, you really have an understanding of both the good and the bad of life. And I was pleased to see that the dean of all the prosecutors in this country, Robert Morgenthau, wrote an op-ed piece strongly praising her.

I'm glad to see her restraint as a judge. We don't need somebody who's going to be undercutting Congress, second-guessing, or being an activist. And she's not.

I wanted somebody outside the judicial monastery. Here's her background was such that she had had a lot of experience outside the judicial monastery. So I think when you're from the south Bronx or the south side of Chicago or south Burlington, Vermont, your life experiences do shape you. She's never forgotten where she's from. I will be meeting with the -- I'll be meeting tomorrow morning with Senator Sessions to talk about this again on scheduling.

But let me just say one thing on a personal point of view. I know how difficult it is for somebody who is nominated. They can't answer charges. They can't speak out. But they're a nominee. So I'm different than those of us who run for elected office and we're in a debate a day.

I think some of the attacks made against her have been among the most vicious I've ever seen by anybody when you have the leaders of the Republican Party. One called her the equivalent of the head of the Ku Klux Klan. Another called her a bigot. The one thing that gives me any consolation in this, the senators, the Republican senators, have not done that and they've resisted from it.

Because you come down to the end, there's only 101 people who get a say in her going on the court out of the 300 billion Americans. First and foremost, of course, the president in making the nomination. Then the hundred senators in voting on it.

So, any questions?

QUESTION: Senator Leahy, did the difficult issues come up? I mean you talked about this weekend, on Sunday, about the issue of her saying that a Latina woman would make a better decision. What was her thinking (ph).

LEAHY: No, thank you for asking. Normally, as you know, I don't talk about what a nominee says to me. And I've been here for -- well, I've been here -- I think I've voted on everybody that's on the Supreme Court, plus Chief Justice Rehnquist as chief and Sandra Day O'Connor as an associate judge.

When I meet with them, I never talk about -- although I did raise that question. And I asked her if she had any problem with me referring to her answer. She said none whatsoever. What she said was of course one's life experience shapes who you are, but ultimately and completely, and she used those terms, ultimately and completely, as a judge you follow the law.

There's not one law for one race or another. There's not one law for one color or another. There's not one law for rich and another one for poor. There's only one law. And she said ultimately and completely a judge has to follow the law no matter what their upbringing has been.

You know, I -- I think of my own basic upbringing when I was a prosecutor. I had to make up my mind based on what the law was and what somebody had done, not what might have been my own background.

QUESTION: Senator, one of the things that the president said is that she probably didn't use the correct language in trying to make her views clear. Did she say that to you? Did she say that in words (ph)?

LEAHY: No, she told me what her philosophy was. I could -- she's probably has given hundreds of speeches. She's written hundreds of opinions. She's handled huge number of cases. I look at it in the totality. But I asked her what is her philosophy. And her philosophy was that the law completely -- ultimately and completely determines. And I think that's -- I find that very, very satisfactory.

QUESTION: Senator, would you like to see hearings in July?

LEAHY: We'll have hearings -- and some have recommended we have hearings this month. She was nominated last month. I feel that's too soon. I want to have -- so it won't be in June. I want everybody to have a chance to read -- Senator Sessions and I work together to get a questionnaire. The questionnaire was sent from both of us, a bipartisan questionnaire, which I think will be back here in the next couple of days to get her background check, which, of course, was fine. So I -- we'll decide when the hearing's going to be.

But I'll tell you one thing, it will motivate me to go sooner rather than later when you have vicious attacks by leading Republicans call her the equivalent of the head of the Ku Klux Klan and call her a bigot, totally false and outrageous charges. And there's only one place she could answer those charges would be in a hearing. I want her to have a chance to answer those charges.

HARRIS: OK. Perfect. Perfect. Let's jump out at this point. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Patrick Leahy, continuing with his news conference.

We're going to jump out because we're going to pick up on this point, this discussion point right here with Rick Sanchez in just a couple of minutes, on this question, the statement made in a speech by Judge Sonia Sotomayor back in 2001. Let me read the comment that has raised the ire of several conservatives. "I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." That quote, that statement, certainly came up as part of a discussion between the judge and Senator Leahy. And her response to Senator Leahy, "Ultimately and completely you follow the law. There is not one law for one race and another law for another race."

What do you make of the discussion? We'll take it up with Rick Sanchez in just a moment. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: OK. This is going to be good. Judge Sonia Sotomayor making history right now. OK. She is the first Latino woman to make the rounds on Capitol Hill. Look at these pictures. Just take in this moment for just a second. Take in this moment. In a bid to secure her confirmation to the Supreme Court, Sotomayor is meeting with senators who will vote on her nomination.

Rick Sanchez is with me now.

And, Rick, I apologize here. It looks like I'm putting you in the role to be our lead Hispanic anchor and correspondent here. But I know . . .

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I will suit (ph) the bills (ph).

HARRIS: OK. But I know you have some things that you want to say about this. Let's get to what is likely to be the pivotal moment, at least one of them, in the confirmation hearings going forward.

SANCHEZ: This question.

HARRIS: This question.

SANCHEZ: Over that statement.

HARRIS: All right. Over the statement. Do you want to do it? You want to set it up? You want to tee it up?

SANCHEZ: No, no. I understand that there's some comment now from one of the senators who met with her.

HARRIS: Yes, let's tee it up. This is the statement back in 2001 in a speech.

SANCHEZ: Right.

HARRIS: All right. She gave to a group of Hispanic . . .

SANCHEZ: It was a speech.

HARRIS: Attorneys. Lawyers.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Just a speech.

HARRIS: It was a speech.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

HARRIS: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with a richness of hers experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." OK. This is October 26, 2001.

SANCHEZ: Right.

HARRIS: You heard . . .

SANCHEZ: And to be fair, let's stop right there.

HARRIS: Right.

SANCHEZ: Let the viewers know that this was a very nuanced speech with lots of elements. There was much that she has said before that and much that she continued to go on to say after that, which creates real distinct possibilities of what her meaning or her context was, aside from the one that has been pitched for the most part in the news media. That's not to say the one that's been pitched in the news media is wrong, it's just to offer alternatives for what else she was possibly doing here. One of which, by the way, is the possibility that she was just trying to be funny. Tongue in cheek, as if to say, you know, I would expect that one of the best anchor men in America would be a Cuban guy who played football at the University of Minnesota and was on the air right now with Tony. I would think a guy like that . . .

HARRIS: Did you forget my name?

SANCHEZ: I would think a guy like that would be . . .

HARRIS: Did you just forget my name?

SANCHEZ: No. I would think that a guy like that would probably be better suited to be an anchor than an (INAUDIBLE).

HARRIS: How about it being just an aspirational (ph) -- how it being just an aspirational speech. How about it being a speech that I would make to African-American kids in schools all over the country. What about that, just to pump you up, to lift you up, to leave you with the impression -- now I understand . . .

SANCHEZ: Well, yes, but we don't want to be in a position either, as an Hispanic and as an African-American guy . . .

HARRIS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: You and I can't put ourselves in a position where we're making excuses for her either. But it is important to consider that if she was doing it with her tongue placed firmly on the side of her cheek, or, b, she was trying to make a broader point, which is also a possibility. And again, look, you can't get into people's heads and figure out exactly what they thought. There is a possibility that what she was saying is, "As a Latina woman who grew up in a barrio (ph), who grew up in a project, I may have experiences that I will share that nobody else who doesn't have that can share." That's an important distinction.

HARRIS: But how do you conjugate that -- and we'll get back to that in a moment -- and to being a racist comment? All right. That in a second.

Dana Bash is standing by. She was at the press conference with Senator Leahy.

And, Dana, I know you've got some flavor, some color from this news conference for us.

DANA BASH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right. I know you were just talking about it just now about what Senator Leahy said. And I think that that was probably the most fascinating thing that came out of Senator Leahy's press conference describing her meeting.

HARRIS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: What did he say?

BASH: Describing her meeting. And basically what he said was that he, the Democrat, you know, the lead Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, he decided he wanted to ask her about those controversial comments you have been talking about suggesting that as a Latina she might be better equipped to make a decision from the bench then a white male. And what his response was, was that she said that she will ultimately and completely follow the law. Those are the two key words that they wanted to get out there on the Democratic side here. Ultimately and completely.

So a couple of points here, Tony. Number one, it's important to underscore and highlight the fact that it was the Democrats -- you and I were talking about this earlier that Senator Feinstein asked about it. But it was the lead Democrat on the Judiciary Committee who decided that he wanted to get a clarification of her controversial comments out there. And it was on accident, Tony. There's no question it was on an accident that they wanted to tape (ph) this. That they wanted to tape (ph) this and not the Republicans who have been really hitting it hard.

SANCHEZ: I'm going to interrupt you for just a moment just to suggest this. We didn't get a clarification from that statement that you just read us. All we're -- I mean that's like saying, by the way, I'm going to be a really good jurist and I'm never going to do anything wrong. The questions are, why did she say it? What was her motive? Was she trying to be funny? Was she trying to make a broader point? And none of that is being answered in what you just gave us.

BASH: Those are great questions. And as Senator Leahy was walking out of the room, I said her, I said, just to -- I asked him, I said, just to be clear, did you ask for clarification on that comment? And he said, yes. I said, well, did you ask if she regretted them or did you asked if she thought that she should use different language? Did you ask if maybe she thinks they were being taken out of context? He said he didn't ask about any of those questions.

HARRIS: No, no, no, no, Rick, no, no, no, no, hang on a second.

SANCHEZ: Good stuff.

HARRIS: What are we missing here? Is there a broader context here? When the woman says, I bring experiences, but I will ultimately and completely follow the law, there is not one law for one race and another law for another race, isn't that clarity?

SANCHEZ: No, it's not. That's opaque. That's an opaque answer. There's nothing clear about that.

HARRIS: There is not one law for one race and not -- and I will ultimately and completely follow the law is opaque?

SANCHEZ: No. The point that Dana is making and the point that you're not taking into consideration here, why did she use the word better? Why did she use the word better? Which does sound, on its face, by itself, without looking at anything else, like a statement that is discriminatory.

HARRIS: So we extrapolate that . . .

SANCHEZ: (INAUDIBLE).

HARRIS: We extrapolate that into questions about her judicial temperament now and what she'll do as a justice on the Supreme Court?

SANCHEZ: No, we ask her -- no, we ask her what any good journalist would do in this situation, why did you make that statement? What did you mean by that statement? And if you had it to do over again, would you choose different words?

HARRIS: Dana, I hear you. You want to jump in?

BASH: Yes. Yes. Well here's the unfortunate bottom line. We are racing around putting, you know, probably at this point miles on our shoes following her around and she's not answering reporters' questions.

HARRIS: Of course. And she's not (ph).

BASH: And she won't. And so the point is, is that so far she's had two meetings with Democrats. She's in a third meeting with the lead Republican as we speak. In fact, I'm standing outside the door right now where she is meeting with Jeff Sessions, the lead Republican on the Judiciary Committee.

Perhaps he will ask some more questions that will get more to the bottom of some of why she said what she said and what she really meant. What we have so far, though, is a clear political move by President Obama's fellow Democrats to try to get out ahead of this, to try to put their imprint on it before Republicans do in terms of what she is saying she really meant when she said those words. That's where we are right now in the story.

HARRIS: Nice.

SANCHEZ: Good reporting.

HARRIS: You're going to find out exactly what she meant. There's one setting for it, and that is the Senate Judiciary Committee. The question will be asked. I can't wait for the question to be asked. And it will be answered.

SANCHEZ: And let's -- again, to be fair, if her name was Theodore Smith and she was from Rosemont, New Jersey, and she was at the top of her class in Princeton, head of the Harvard Law Review, appointed by a Republican president, George Bush, promoted by a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, had 17 years of judicial experience and was a super good D.A. and had turned down 81 percent of the times discrimination cases, we wouldn't be having this argument and . . .

HARRIS: Do we getting to go back and ask the judges in the Plessy case, "Hey, what were you thinking? What was it about your temperament and your experience back then that led you to that decision?" Do we get to go back and ask that question? Come on.

SANCHEZ: There's certainly a good point to be made that for years and years most of the judges were white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant males, and it was a given that they all brought pretty much the same experiences.

HARRIS: Did you bring your experience to that decision?

SANCHEZ: So maybe it's a good thing that people are having this discussion. And, you know, to a certain extent when you look at this, you do wonder if we are now politicizing . . .

HARRIS: I can't even believe the question is being asked. And I can't wait for her to hopefully knock it out of the park.

SANCHEZ: But it is. But it is. And we're also politicizing judicial decisions more so than we ever have been in the past.

HARRIS: Doctor, we got to go.

SANCHEZ: Good to see you.

HARRIS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Thanks for having me.

HARRIS: Come on back any time.

A quick programming note here. Coming this October, CNN will present "Latino in America." It will be a comprehensive look at how Latinos are changing this nation, reshaping politics, business schools, churches and neighborhoods. This prime time television event this October right here on CNN. We're back in the newsroom in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: Saving for your kids college versus saving for retirement and is it a good time to refinance your mortgage? Personal finance editor Gerri Willis and her team of experts at The Help Desk take on your money questions.

GERRI WILLIS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We want to get you answers to your financial questions. Let's get straight to The Help Desk. Beth Kobliner is the author of "Get a Financial Life" and John Simons is the senior personal finance editor at "Black Enterprise" magazine.

OK, guys, let's get down to it. Joyce asks, " I currently have a 15 year fixed mortgage interest rate of 6.5 percent. I have 11 years left on my current mortgage. I am looking at refinancing at 5 percent for 15 years fixed (FHA). The company is calling it a streamline refinance. I'm being told that all I have to bring at closing is my June mortgage payment to cover the fees. Is it to my advantage to refinance?"

John, it's a great question. What do you say?

JOHN SIMONS, SR. PERSONAL FINANCE EDITOR, "BLACK ENTERPRISE": Absolutely it is to her advantage to refinance. It's called a streamline, not because there aren't fees and payments associated with this. It's called that because she doesn't have to fill out all the papers and forms and jump through all the hoops like you normally would with the refinance. It's a very good option. It's also great that she has a 15-year mortgage that a lot of people don't consider. You end up paying a lot less interest with that over the life of the loan than with a standard 30-year.

WILLIS: All right. OK. Let's get to the next question.

"My husband is 39 and a firefighter paramedic with a state retirement plan. I'm 41 and work at home for a local business. I don't have much in my 401(k) but put in the max the company matches me on. We've paid off all our debts except our house, but I'm worried about retirement. We have two kids and no college fund. Should we put more money into savings, in my 401(K) or in a college fund?"

Beth, how many people face this problem where they've got so many demands for their money and not enough to go around?

BETH KOBLINER, AUTHOR, "GET A FINANCIAL LIFE": Priorities. It's so hard. Priorities. Do you save for your kids? Do you save for yourself? The answer for her is similar to what we've said over the years. You can save for retirement, but it doesn't have to be only for retirement. If you put money into 401(k)s, you can often borrow against them. I would see if her husband has a 401(K) with matching. Even though he has a pension plan, he may have some sort of state program where he gets some matching. So look into that. Open Roth IRAs I'd say for both of them. And with Roth IRAs, a lot of people don't realize, you can withdrawal the money you put into a Roth IRA free from taxes or penalties. So that might be something down the road if they need the money. I think they're doing great. They should just max out of those retirement plans.

WILLIS: All right. Lots of ways to save for college, obviously.

The Help Desk is all about getting you answers. Send me an e-mail to gerri@cnn.com. Or log on to cnn.com/helpdesk to see more of our financial solutions.

And The Help Desk is everywhere. Make sure to check out the latest issue of "Money" magazine on newsstands now.

HARRIS: Kyra Phillips at the top of the hour. Before we get there, we will get a check of weather with Chad Myers in the severe weather center. We're back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Hot enough for you, Tony?

Yes, mean hurricane season is on the way. You know it when the humidity is in the air like it is here in Atlanta and all the way across the deep, deep South.

Look at the Atlantic hurricane names because yesterday was the season start. Even though we talked a lot about Air France 447, this was the beginning of the season. Ana, Bill Claudette, Danny and Erika. And then Fred and Grace. Don't you love it when like your name shows up on here and you can have your own hurricane? May not happen for all of you this year, but it could be a busy season, although we're thinking maybe El Nino could knock it down. I haven't seen El Nino show its head yet. We'll still see.

We could have at least 15 storms this year. Probably more like nine to 10. But we'll see.

Tony.

HARRIS: I want Tony to be a Cat Five, but I want it to be a fish storm. Just a fish storm.

MYERS: OK. All right.

HARRIS: All right, Chad, appreciate it.

MYERS: It will be Anthony, though.

HARRIS: Anthony. Thank you, Chad. MYERS: All right.

HARRIS: We are pushing forward now with the next hour of CNN NEWSROOM with Kyra Phillips.