Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Murder or Terrorism?; Search Continues For Missing Plane; Latest Call for Truth Commission; Honoring President Reagan
Aired June 02, 2009 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RANDALL TERRY, FOUNDER, OPERATION RESCUE: George Tiller was a mass murderer. And, horrifically, he reaped what he sowed.
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): So, he deserved it? Is that a warning to other abortion providers? And if so, is that terrorism?
Rick Sanchez joins me, after saying Iraq was an institutional failure. And he was in charge. Sanchez on Sanchez -- that's kind of weird.
And President Obama embraces the Reagan era, the moments.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RONALD REAGAN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: God bless this country we love.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Nancy Reagan makes a White House appearance. And you will see it, here, live.
Your national conversation for Tuesday, June 2, 2009, begins right now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: I was a reporter during the Reagan era. I love that era.
Hello, again, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez with the next generation of news. This is a conversation, and it's your turn to get involved.
And here's what much of America needs to be talking about on this day. What is murder, and what is terrorism? There is a distinction. And this is not about one case. This is about two cases, the killing of a U.S. soldier and the killing of a doctor who also was an abortion provider.
Now, here's some brand-new pictures I want to share with you. This is just in to CNN. It turns out this guy, this 23-year-old, accused of killing a U.S. soldier outside a Little Rock military center, is a Muslim convert. He used to be Carlos Bledsoe. That was his name, Carlos Bledsoe.
But now he is Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who was apparently radicalized on a recent trip to Yemen and has been under investigation by federal officials. And ABC News is now reporting that he was caught with a Somali passport. Suspected murderer or suspected terrorist?
And now we can also ask a very similar question about Scott Roeder. He's the man accused of killing Dr. George Tiller. This is what Roeder allegedly wrote. This is on a Web site of Operation Rescue, the premier anti-abortion blog. Let me read this to you.
It goes like this -- quote -- ""Tiller is the concentration camp Mengele of our day and needs to be stopped before he and those who protect him bring judgment upon our nation." It sounds like Scott Roeder wrote that. And does that sound like he was responding from an environment of terror?
Listen to these words now. This is Randall Terry. I want you to follow along. And this is the man who founded Operation Rescue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TERRY: The point that must be emphasized over and over and over again, pro-life leaders and the pro-life movement are not responsible for George Tiller's death.
George Tiller was a mass murderer. And, horrifically, he reaped what he sowed.
QUESTION: So, who is responsible?
TERRY: The man who shot him is responsible.
QUESTION: That made it sound like you were saying that he was responsible for his own death.
TERRY: He -- the man who shot him is responsible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Yes, but the words he just uttered -- and you heard them just like I did, right -- reap what he sowed, reap what he sowed. Is he saying that the expectation for Dr. Tiller is that he got what he deserved?
How did you hear it? In other words, again, was there a climate of terror that was being created, and not just by the accused killer in that e-mail I read from him, but perhaps by others?
Here's what another doctor who's now in fear has to say about this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. WARREN HERN, DIRECTOR, BOULDER ABORTION CLINIC: The important point I would like to make is that the assassination of Dr. Tiller was not the act of a lone, deranged gunman acting alone.
This is the result of 35 years of anti-abortion harassment, and terrorism, and hate speech, and rhetoric, and harsh names, and exploitation of the -- of the abortion issue as a political issue to get power. And this is the inevitable result of this kind of hateful behavior by the anti-abortion movement.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: And, on this day, as we have the intersection of these two stories, these two potential cases of, not just murder, but terrorism, we want to open up this discussion.
There's also this, by the way. I want to share this with you. This is the report that the government had put out. Remember, we brought you this a couple of months ago? It's a report that's warning all of us about radicalized Muslim converts coming back to the United States who may sneak into our country. And it also warns us about homegrown terrorists, Americans who turn on their fellow citizens.
Here's part of that report -- quote -- "Right-wing extremism is broadly divided into groups that are primarily hate-oriented. They may include groups dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion."
Are these two cases, the Arkansas shooting and the abortion provider killing in Arkansas -- or in Kansas -- pardon me -- examples of terrorism in America?
Like I said, it's an important discussion.
Joining us is Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center. And also who is going to be with us in just a little bit is Wayne Slater of "The Dallas Morning News," who has been looking into this.
Heidi, let me begin with you.
According to what you spend an entire year working on, cases of potential terrorism -- we will call it that -- are both of these cases of terrorism?
HEIDI BEIRICH, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH, SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: Yes, they both seem to be acts of violence that were motivated by some kind of political ideology or belief system. And that's usually how, you know, terrorism is defined.
In the one case, you have someone who is motivated by extreme anti-abortion and perhaps anti-government views, and the other, someone who has been implicated in some sort of -- it looks at least at this point -- some hateful Muslim ideology.
SANCHEZ: Yes, inculcated. The parallel seems to me here -- tell me if I'm wrong -- Wayne, and if you want to jump in, please do so -- both of them appear to have been in one way or another egged on, you know, the fellow in the abortion situation -- the abortion shooting apparently by everything having to do with Web sites and rhetoric, and the other fellow by going to -- to Yemen and perhaps being radicalized, right?
WAYNE SLATER, AUTHOR, "THE ARCHITECT: KARL ROVE AND THE MASTER PLAN FOR ABSOLUTE POWER": Yes, look, these are absolutely different cases in terms of the facts on the ground, if you will. But they are identical in a fundamental way.
As Heidi said, they are driven by an ideology. It is ideologically-driven violence that produces this. And in both cases, as well as other cases of this -- homegrown terrorists, the secessionists here in Texas who were engaged in a gunfire, gunfight, that killed someone some years ago, the bombing some years ago in West Virginia of the school board building by the anti-textbook activists and so forth, they are all driven by an ideology that goes beyond sort of a reasonable, rational behavior, and within an echo chamber, both on the Net now, the Internet, as well as on TV and radio, that ultimately drives someone like this to act.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Let me stop you with the echo chamber.
We have put together a report that I want you to watch. It's the possibility that the echo chamber isn't just something that we hear from day to day as a constant drumbeat, but that actually can move people to violence.
Watch this. It's Carol Costello.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Hundreds gathered to mourn Dr. George Tiller, a man they called caring and loving. There is anger here, too, at the man who allegedly physically killed Tiller, and at those who say they demonized him.
ELEANOR SMEAL, PRESIDENT, FEMINIST MAJORITY FOUNDATION: So, those who stir up the pot and then now they say they feel sorry, well, I'm sorry. They -- they bear some responsibility for having demonized him, unfairly, ridiculously.
BILL O'REILLY, HOST, "THE O'REILLY FACTOR": George Tiller, known as Tiller the baby killer, Tiller is executing fetuses.
COSTELLO: Liberal blog sites like The Daily Kos, agree, pointing a finger of blame at FOX talk show host Bill O'Reilly, who has debated for years whether Tiller should be allowed to practice.
TERRY: George Tiller was a mass murderer.
COSTELLO: Others who support abortion rights point the finger of blame at abortion opponents like Randall Terry, who founded Operation Rescue and often led protests at Tiller's abortion clinic.
TERRY: And George Tiller was a murderer and he was doing something that was literally demonic. So, how can you not demonize something that is so intrinsically evil?
COSTELLO: Terry says he doesn't condone killing abortion providers, but says Tiller's death shouldn't preclude telling the truth.
Criminologists we talked with say it's unlikely words alone could drive someone to kill and until we know more about the accused killer, it's best not to speculate. But many anti-abortion groups are clearly on the defensive, Frontline Pregnancy Centers issuing this statement: "Violence against abortionists is not pro-life."
And the National Right to Life "unequivocally condemns any such acts of violence, regardless of motivation."
Cynthia Gorney, who wrote a book on the abortion wars, says these groups are likely truly sorry Tiller has been killed. It's last thing the anti-abortion movement wanted to happen.
CYNTHIA GORNEY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY: You are going to get a huge backlash against right to life. You are going to get a lot of people now saying, see, those people are all crazy; they all advocate violence.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: Were they motivated, Heidi? Was this accused killer motivated in the Kansas case?
BEIRICH: Well, this guy has been involved in extreme far-right politics for years and years and years. He was involved in the Freemen back in the '90s. He was found at one point to have bomb components in his car. He's been active in anti-abortion circles, tax protests. So, yes, he's lived in an environment of extreme ideologies.
And we have talked to a lot of psychologists over the years. And, after a while, the stuff can really get to you. It can drive you to commit acts of violence.
SANCHEZ: What do you see in Texas, Wayne Slater, working for the -- writing for "The Dallas Morning News"? Do you find that Americans now are more apt to go after each another, as opposed to right after 9/11, when we had very much a defined common enemy?
SLATER: Oh, it's clearly a different environment, not only here in Texas, but probably everywhere across the country.
Let me differ just a little bit with Heidi. And I think she probably wouldn't disagree with this. Fundamentally, living here in Texas, among many good Southern Baptists and Christian conservatives, most pro-life activists and pro-life advocates, the vast, vast, vast majority of those would never kill anyone or hurt anyone, even though they violently, as it were, disagree with this kind of activity. It is that fringe, the marginalia of sort of the Christian right, political right, social right that -- whether it's a loner or a group of loners who are driven by this sort of echo chamber who go out and commit these heinous acts of violence.
So, I think it is fair not to criticize the entire pro-abortion -- anti-abortion movement. They're not doing this. But there are some crazy people who are fed by the rhetoric who do, do it.
SANCHEZ: Point well made. Thank you for the distinction.
Wayne, Heidi, my thanks to both of you.
BEIRICH: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: Who are the most active terror groups right here in the United States? Who do we really need to be worried about? And what else can we learn about this situation of this Yemeni -- supposed Yemeni trip that had turned an American into a convert? We're going to be talking to the FBI about that.
Also, take a look at this. This is lightning striking a plane on flight, proof that planes are designed to withstand harsh weather conditions, right? However, the search is continuing as we speak for that Air France jet that disappeared over the Atlantic carrying 228 passengers and crew. And we're all over that.
And now debris, we understand, debris has been spotted in the ocean. We're following this new development. We're going to bring it to you.
Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: A lot of comments coming in on that last section. I am going to share them with you in just a little bit.
But, first, new information in that plane crash off the Atlantic, as promised. The Brazilian air force is now reporting to us that it has spotted some debris floating atop the Atlantic, not far from the projected path of the Air France jet that vanished yesterday.
Items spotted include an airplane seat, an orange life vest, and some signs of fuel. There is little hope left for the 228 souls on the Rio-to-Paris flight. It does appear the A-330 flew into the path of a storm, but what might have brought it down is still far from clear.
Rick Sanchez, the other one, the one who was in charge of the Iraq war, he joins me after saying that that war was, in many ways, an institutional failure, strong words.
And then Tom Tancredo, who talked to me about racism -- you remember that interview -- he has an aide who slapped and insulted an African-American woman. Wait until you hear why he did it. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: And there's some video that's just come in to us that I want to share with you. Let me set this up with you.
Sonia Sotomayor has been meeting all day long with senators who finally may decide whether or not she will be on the Supreme Court of the United States. Well, moments ago, she was meeting with Mitch McConnell, and one of our producers, Ted Barrett, took it upon himself to ask her a very difficult question, actually, what her reaction is to all the commentary that's been made about the possibility of her being a racist because of that speech that she had made in the past?
I want you to watch this now. We will watch it together. It's a little bit eerie about how she almost wants to respond. I will leave it at that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: Judge Sotomayor, what do you think of the fact that two prominent conservatives have called you a racist?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Kind of one of those moments when you almost say, I wish I could say what I wish I could say, but I can't.
In fact, she's been that way throughout the entire day. She met with Senator Sessions and she met with the -- with Harry Reid and several others, and for the most part they have talked afterward, not saying a whole lot. She has said nil, nothing. We will stay on it.
Brutal killings in Kansas and Arkansas, were they just that or acts of terrorism? And where are they on the list as we start worrying about what's going on in this country?
All right, that guy right there, we can now I suppose officially call him Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad. He used to be Carlos Bledsoe. He's 23 years old. Obviously, he's changed his name and become a Muslim. Police say he's a convert who got some guns and went looking for military people in uniform to kill. He found two and is charged with killing one of them. That was yesterday.
We have learned some things about this fellow, by the way, like his motivations to kill were political and religious and that his name was known to the FBI before he committed these killings, which is kind of troubling.
Let's get to the FBI on our list. Tom Fuentes is the bureau's former assistant director.
Tom, thanks so much for being with us again. TOM FUENTES, FORMER FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR: Hi, Rick.
SANCHEZ: What do you know about this guy? What have you learned?
FUENTES: I actually have not learned much on that particular case. Obviously, they are holding it close to the vest because it's a pending prosecution and the investigation is still under way into what his background was and what motivated him to take those actions that he took.
SANCHEZ: Yes, let me ask you a question. When we learned, as I just reported, that he was apparently on some type of watch list, the next question, I imagine, from a lot of viewers who are watching this newscast and waiting for your answer now is, well, if he was on a watch list, why weren't they watching him more closely; why was he allowed to do something like this?
FUENTES: Well, I think there's been enough publicity about how many tens of thousands of people have made that watch list. And certainly the FBI, with 14,000 FBI agents and the other law enforcement and intelligence services, cannot watch every person all the time.
So, the fact that someone's on a watch list usually is going to kick in if they're trying to board an airplane or enter this country or another country or -- or take action with another group of individuals. But thousands of people have made the watch list for a variety of reasons. And there's just not enough resources to go.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: What is your reaction to what's being reported up to now, that he's a Muslim convert, that he's changed his name, that he may have had a Somali passport, and that he apparently, according to ABC News -- we haven't confirmed this yet -- may have had a recent trip to Yemen?
FUENTES: Well, you know, all that's still being investigated, but it obviously shows that at some point he decided to become an extremist or become a jihadist. And how that process worked in his individual case will be yet to be determined.
Also, there are tens of thousands jihadist Web sites out there. People can access them by themselves. They don't need to be in contact with other individuals to suddenly develop the urge to become killers.
SANCHEZ: So, in other words, you can become a terrorist in this country and go after people, hopefully not, but you could do it living in a small town in the United States or a big town in the United States and you don't have to go to some Muslim country to do so?
FUENTES: No, that's absolutely true. And this is the primary worry of everyone involved in national security, whether it's the FBI or the CIA or Department of Homeland Security. That's why the concern of the so-called lone wolf, because they're not in groups. They're not associating with other people. They're probably not communicating their philosophy with others that might be reported to law enforcement to -- to even enable a further investigation.
So, this is a constant concern, that someone can develop that motivation on their own, with no outside -- other than the Internet or television.
SANCHEZ: If this information stays as it is and we go on to understand this all as fact, is this terrorism? Is this an act of terrorism?
FUENTES: Well, the fact that it's an individual -- the definition for terrorism vs. organized crime or vs. a regular homicide is really the motivation of the person doing the killing.
So, if this person is killing on behalf of his own religious belief or for political motivation, it's not designed for greed or personal vengeance against someone, then, yes, it's an act of terrorism.
SANCHEZ: Tom, thanks so much for being with us, as usual.
FUENTES: You're welcome.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was very impressed with her on knowledge, her experience, her energy level. It was a delight to talk with her.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: This is what I was just telling you about moments ago. We have been watching these come and go all day long. So far, so good, Judge Sonia Sotomayor getting several thumbs up in reviews from both Democrats and Republican. What else are senators saying, though, about their meet-and-greet with the Supreme Court nominee today?
And then let me know what you think of this one. The president and the first lady -- you may have seen these pictures -- they have a night out on the town, right? They go to a show on Broadway. Is he using the people's time and money, or doing what any good husband should do with his wife? We want to know what you think about this, because there's a lot of commentary on both sides. I want yours, and I will share.
I will be right back.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CALLER: Hi, Sy Sherwood (ph), Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
If a white man had said it, Rick -- and you know this to be true -- he would have been railroaded out of town. I don't want a lady like this on the Supreme Court.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. We have got some more breaking news, some new information that's just now coming in to me. Let me let you know what I'm -- what we're hearing.
First of all, as a backdrop for this, let me let you know as well that the president of the United States is going to be going this Thursday to give a speech in Cairo. Again, it's the president's continued effort to try to reach out to the moderate Muslim world.
But, as I'm reporting this to you, there's reaction coming in from the not-so-moderate Muslim world. We haven't heard from Ayman al-Zawahri in quite a while, but apparently we're hearing from him right now.
Let's go to Octavia Nasr. She monitors reaction from the Muslim world and is joining us now to let us know what she's finding out.
What is he saying, Octavia?
OCTAVIA NASR, CNN SENIOR EDITOR FOR ARAB AFFAIRS: Rick, a very interesting development indeed.
On Islamic Web sites -- these are the radical Islamic Web sites that we monitor -- this is where all the messages from al Qaeda appear first, statements, videos -- as we're monitoring there, there's a new message from the number-two man in al Qaeda, Ayman Al-Zawahri.
It's an audio message lasting about 10 minutes long. I was just listening to it. Basically, the title is, the tyrants of Egypt and the -- America's agents welcome Obama.
This is a direct message to the basically Muslim world, the same world that President Obama will be addressing in a couple of days, and basically telling them that the people welcoming President Obama in Egypt and in Saudi Arabia are the tyrants, and they are the agents of America.
This is, of course, nothing new in the rhetoric, in the al Qaeda rhetoric, very consistent with what they have said before. The interesting thing here is that the -- the speed at which Ayman Al- Zawahri was able to tape this message and send it out, beam it out, through the Internet.
SANCHEZ: And, of course, it's something I imagine the Secret Service is going to be monitoring very carefully. Egypt has been known to be a dangerous place for leaders in the past.
NASR: Yes, it has. You know, you may remember the president of Egypt, Anwar Sadat, who was assassinated...
(CROSSTALK) SANCHEZ: That's exactly what I was referring to as a matter of fact.
NASR: ... when he was -- yes, he was standing at a podium in a military display, and he was assassinated there.
SANCHEZ: So, but this is -- but this is not a threat, per se, right?
NASR: No.
SANCHEZ: He's basically saying, we hate you.
NASR: He's saying, we hate you. He's repeating the same message basically. This is something that they have said all along. This is the same message that Osama bin Laden sends out every time there is a development.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
NASR: As a matter of fact, experts will look at this and say that al Qaeda is nervous about President Obama's ideas of openness, President Obama's idea to speak to the Muslim world.
SANCHEZ: Huh.
NASR: They are nervous about it.
As a matter of fact, monitoring these Web sites, we have seen a lot of rhetoric about basically that President Obama is not going to be able to achieve anything, that -- that the U.S. will always hate Muslims and so forth.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
NASR: But very interesting, indeed, to -- to think about President Obama going to Egypt to deliver his speech. He's not going to be in a public -- in an open space. It is believed that he will be speaking at the University of Cairo. So, definitely security is on his mind.
SANCHEZ: Yes, it's kind of good to hear, as a matter of fact. I didn't know that.
Octavia Nasr, as usual, you do a great job following up on this for us. And we appreciate the update.
SANCHEZ: There's someone we take this to in just a little bit, the former general of Iraq, Rick Sanchez. There he is. He's standing by. It will be one of the things that we will be taking up with him in just a moment.
Stay with us. Rick Sanchez interviews Rick Sanchez.
(LAUGHTER)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
The latest call for a truth commission to investigate the workings of the Bush administration is coming from an unexpected source. General Rick Sanchez led military forces in Iraq during 2003 and 2004. Those were, in part, the years when the insurgency, in many ways, took hold, when failures by planners in Washington seemed to come home to roost. They were also the years of the horrors of Abu Ghraib.
Retired now from the Army, General Sanchez has written a book. It's called "A Soldier's Story: Wiser in Battle." That is now in paperback.
He is joining me now from San Antonio, Texas. And we thank him.
And I suppose I have to open with, what's with the strange name?
LT. GEN. RICARDO SANCHEZ (RET.), AUTHOR, "IT'S A SOLDIER'S STORY": It's a great name, Rick.
SANCHEZ: You were originally Ricardo, right?
GEN. SANCHEZ: Well, that's correct. I am still Ricardo S. Sanchez, but in the military I went by "Rick."
SANCHEZ: It's interesting. You're a guy who grew up in the border, and as a kid, I imagine, very socially connected, humble beginnings. You go on to lead a war that is being undertaken by a very staunch, hard-line leadership in Washington.
I'm not sure the fit is there. Is this part of the reason that you are now sounding or seeming to have an epiphany about your time as a general in Iraq?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: No, Rick. I think what this is all about is tying back to those roots, and those roots were -- as you well know, the Hispanic culture is very much about a love of country. It's about integrity. It's about courage. It's about loving your family. And in the end, I think that's what drives me to this day, is that...
SANCHEZ: Well, how does loving your country have to do with some of the very critical things that you've been saying lately about the Bush administration, frankly?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Well, because it's about getting America to move forward, and until America can really understand what has happened to it and look at it objectively and truthfully, we will still continue to be mired in the past. And we've got to learn the lessons and never go this way again. They were institutional and individual failures, both in the execution of the war, and in the interrogation approaches and the policies that came out of Washington, and that were implemented on the ground.
SANCHEZ: What do you mean by institutional failures? LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Well, I think when you look at the executive branch, we know now that we had some significant challenges in the development of the policy. We had oversight challenges with our oversight mechanisms. We had -- the different departments faltered in developing the guidance for executing those policies. And then I think we also had dereliction of duty at those levels when we were faced with the reality and the facts that abuses were occurring on the ground as early as 2002, and we refused to do anything about it.
SANCHEZ: Dereliction of duty on whose part? Who refused to act?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Well, there are clearly reports that came back from the field seeking guidance because of the tremendous problems that were occurring on the ground. There were investigations that had been conducted that are documented in the reports, in the multiple investigative reports that have come out. And people did nothing.
There were soldiers and commanders on the ground. They were desperately seeking guidance in order to stop and possibly contain this, and America does not put out an interrogation policy until September of 2006. That's four years.
SANCHEZ: But something was done. There were some real -- there were some underlings, some soldiers, who were prosecuted for this, the lowest of the low in rank, and yet nobody above them has ever been touched.
Is that wrong?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Well, that's not exactly true, Rick. I mean, there are a lot of people that have been...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: OK. General Karpinski, with the exception of her...
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Look, Rick, every single general that was even tangentially associated with this problem in Iraq lost their careers. And there have been others that were court-martialed and convicted because of issues that stemmed from this problem.
SANCHEZ: But were they the ones really responsible...
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: No.
SANCHEZ: ... or were the real decisions made here, did they come from Washington?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: No, see, that's my whole rationale for believing in the need for a truth commission. We have allowed this debate to get to a point where the only suitable outcome that we seem willing to accept is prosecution of individuals.
In fact, a truth commission has -- is probably the only mechanism left now for us to have objectivity and unbiased approach to determining what happened to us as a country and how did we leave this moral high ground. And until we can regain truth and objectivity, America will continue to struggle.
SANCHEZ: Why did the military, folks like yourself, General, with all due respect, capitulate to the politicians in power who, it seems from what you're saying, may have asked you to do things that you weren't necessarily comfortable with?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: No, there was no capitulation that was going on. I think what you're faced with, especially if you're on the ground, you're faced with orders. And, I mean, that is exactly what I was trying to prevent with the publication of my memorandums, which have been -- the debate has distorted those memorandums as the opening of the environment.
In fact, they were to contain this unconstrained environment that had been in existence for well over a year by the time that we encounter it in Iraq. This is what I'm referring to here.
The mechanisms that are responsible for establishing accountability have lost their credibility within the country, and there's a lack of trust in them. And a truth commission, I believe, is the only way for us to regain that.
And in the end, all options have to be open, from commendation -- because, in fact, there were some people that were doing some tremendous work to try to contain this -- all the way to prosecutions. And until we can do that, we won't be able to move forward.
SANCHEZ: You know, there's -- before I let you go, I should tell you that a lot of people listen to your words now -- certainly, they're important words -- and would wonder why you're saying these things. Is it going to -- is it a net gain or a net loss for you to come out and say these things now?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: No, see...
SANCHEZ: Because I could really argue it both ways.
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Absolutely. And, you know, I can't get away from this. The fact is that I am associated and will always be associated with Abu Ghraib...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: And that bothers you, huh? It seems to bug you.
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: No, it doesn't bother me. I think it's something that I've learned to live with, but I also live with the fact that, as I've stated before, I've never compromised my integrity or my honor in the course of this ordeal. But there's two key reasons.
One, is the fact that America needs to understand the complexity of this problem that has hounded us now for four years. The second, and probably the most important motivation for me, is to make sure that soldiers are never again abandoned on the battlefield the way my soldiers were. And we were abandoned on the battlefield because of a lack of policy guidance, a lack of structure, a lack of training. And even when commanders were asking for this help, it didn't come.
SANCHEZ: Man, there's so much we can talk about, and I think people are interested in what you have to say, General.
Will you come back?
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Absolutely.
SANCHEZ: Can we do some more of this? I really appreciate it. I certainly appreciate your candor. And it's interesting to finally have the intersection of two Rick Sanchezes.
LT. GEN. SANCHEZ: Thanks, Rick.
SANCHEZ: Thank you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: You feel (ph) the whole package here. Academically, I mean, I am terribly impressed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: What senators are saying after meeting with Sonia Sotomayor.
And you're moments away from seeing Nancy Reagan returning to the White House. This is going to be a really cool moment. I'm glad we can share it.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: She wants to be the next Supreme Court justice, and she would be the first female Hispanic to do so. And today she met with the men who will decide her fate. Interestingly enough, the men.
There she is, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, walking with Majority Leader Harry Reid. She did the sit and meet and greet with several senators on the Judiciary Committee, Democrats Patrick Leahy, Charles Schumer, Mitch McConnell, Jeff Sessions, just to name a few.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: And as I've said to her when we talked the day she was nominated, that she will get a fair hearing in the Judiciary Committee. She'll be treated respectfully, and she will be given an opportunity to answer any allegations that are out there. And I think it's going to be a good process.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: We expected the senators would ask her in-depth about the controversial comments that she had made, but it sounds like they really, for the most part, throughout the day, to be honest with you, from what I've been listening to, anyway, they barely addressed it.
All right. Here's one that we've been asking you. And man, are you getting involved. Should the president be criticized for taking his wife out to dinner during tough times? What you say.
Any moment now, by the way, we're going to be seeing Nancy Reagan arriving at the White House. And that's pretty cool, the return of Nancy Reagan. It will happen on our watch, and we're going to share it with you.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. Welcome back, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez, here in the world headquarters of CNN. And there's a lot that we're covering right now.
I'm just trying to get on my favorites. Yes, I know. A lot of you have been complaining because I haven't been checking in with you.
I promise we're going to have a conversation. We will have a conversation.
I've been collecting a lot of your input having to do with whether the president of the United States should have taken his wife this last Saturday on a date, whether he should have taken her on a date to go to a show and a movie, as I never get enough chance to do with my own wife. I should be talking.
There's some people who are complaining about this, saying, look, the president shouldn't be doing this, it's going to cost the American people too much money, the economy's in bad shape. Look at what's going on with the automobile industry, companies going into bankruptcy. It just didn't look good. It was bad form.
Other people saying, you know what, he's married and he needs to do this, and that's what we would expect a president to do with his wife, just like we would expect a wife to do that with her husband.
Let's bring in Candy Crowley. And as we do that, by the way, I should let you know about what else is going on.
Nancy Reagan is returning to the White House. She's going to have a meeting with the president of the United States. There's the room that is set up for it to happen. And I think this is going to be really -- I think this is going to be really cool. This is the diplomatic meeting room.
Don't you think this is going to be neat, Candy Crowley?
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SR. POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I do, simply because, one is the future and writing history, and the other is the past, which in itself wrote history. I mean, her husband, Ronald Reagan, was one of those presidents that Barack Obama, as a candidate, talked about and said, admiringly in this way -- he said, I may not have agreed with the way he led the nation, but Ronald Reagan was a transformational president. That is, he turned the nation in a different direction.
It was the sort of president that Barack Obama aspired to be. So, there's this kind of connection.
And what the president is going to be doing is signing a piece of paper that sets up the Reagan Centennial Commission, people that will plan for Ronald Reagan's 100th birthday in 2011. He was a very, very popular figure. I think we saw that in his funeral here in D.C.
There were just people out the door and down the street. They had to leave the Capitol open for 24 hours. So he remains a very popular figure.
SANCHEZ: Yes, it's interesting. It's, you know, a Democratic president who is going to be commemorating and making sure that everything about the legacy of Ronald Reagan is remembered in this country. And that's what they apparently are setting up.
Here we have some folks walking into the room. It looks like they are just dignitaries. We don't necessarily have to interrupt what we're talking about now. We'll wait for the former first lady to walk in.
By the way, let me read you some tweets real quick on the other thing, the president of the United States. There's some talk shows and a particular cable station that was asking about this yesterday, complaining about it, quite honestly. Here's what folks on the Twitter board are saying.
"Hey, look, they deserve a night out like everybody else. He paid for his own Broadway tickets anyway and had great publicity in New York City."
Another one says, "A president being happy and secure in his home and life and marriage can only be beneficial to a nation."
Two good points. It seems to be the consensus, Candy.
CROWLEY: It does. And my basic political opinion on this is when you criticize a president who has an approval rating over 60 percent, you are on the losing end of that argument.
And I think that's what you're seeing here. People saying, look, he works constantly for the United States. If he wants to take a plane and run it to New York, so be it. And obviously, his critics have said differently, but they are, by far, outnumbered in the polls and in this argument.
SANCHEZ: All right. Here's the moment that we were waiting for, Nancy Reagan being escorted into the room by the present president of the United States. He seems to be escorting her now to the podium.
Let's just all -- let's just all take this in together. BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, thank you all for coming to the White House today as we commemorate the life and work of a president in the presence of those who loved him and knew him and respected him deeply as both a leader and as a man. And, in particular, I want to thank our special guest here today, Nancy Reagan, our former first lady, who redefined that role in her time at the White House and who has in the many years since, taken on a new role as an advocate on behalf of treatments that hold the promise of improving and saving lives.
And I should just add she has been extraordinarily gracious to both me and Michelle during our transition here, and I'm thankful for that.
There are a few who are not moved by the love that Mrs. Reagan felt for her husband and fewer still who are not inspired by how this love led her to take up the twin causes of stem-cell research and Alzheimer's research. In saying a long good-bye, Nancy Reagan became a voice on behalf of millions of families experiencing the depleting, aching reality of Alzheimer's Disease.
I'd also like to recognize the members of Congress who are standing alongside us, who worked so hard to pass the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act, particularly Congressman Elton Gallegly, the lead sponsor of this bill.
Finally, I want to thank the trustees of the Reagan Foundation who are here today as well.
This legislation, approved by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the House of Representatives, and passed unanimously in the Senate, will create a commission to honor President Reagan on the 100th anniversary of his birth. And I am proud to sign it into law.
President Reagan understood that while there are often strong disagreements between parties and political adversaries, disagreements that can be a source of conflict and bitterness, it is important to keep in mind all that we share. For all of the deepest divides that exist in America, the bonds that bring us together are that much stronger. Now, we may see the world differently, but we must never stop seeing one another as fellow Americans and as patriots who want what is best for the country that we love.
Now, this nation was built on the basis of the principle that we are stronger, not weaker for even the most vigorous debates, debates that have energized our politics since the inventors of America argued over our founding documents more than two centuries ago. Through the weighing of different views, we take measure of where we stand and where we must go. And the moment we fail to recognize the good in those with whom we quarrel is the moment that we've lost sight of who we are as a people.
President Reagan helped as much as any president to restore a sense of optimism in our country, a spirit that transcended politics, that transcended even the most heated arguments of the day. It was this optimism that allowed leaders like the president and Speaker Tip O'Neill, who held sharply different philosophies, to sit down together at the end of difficult debates as friends and to work with one another on complex and contentious issues like Social Security. It was this optimism that the American people sorely needed during a difficult period, a period of economic and global challenges that tested us in unprecedented ways.
In these perilous times, President Reagan had the ability to communicate directly and movingly to the American people, to understand both the hardships they felt in their lives and the hopes that they had for their country. That was powerful. That was important. And we are better off for the extraordinary leadership that he showed.
So, I am glad to have all of you here today. I'm especially glad to have Mrs. Reagan here today as we sign this bill.
I look forward to seeing the fruits of this commission's work culminating in the celebration of President Reagan's life on the occasion of his 100th birthday. And on that morning in America, we can be proud to come together as one nation and one people to honor a leader who loved this country and wanted nothing more than to see its promise fulfilled.
So, thank you all very much. God bless you. God bless the United States of America.
Mrs. Reagan, let's go sign this bill.
NANCY REAGAN, FMR. FIRST LADY: OK.
OBAMA: I think that President Reagan's signature was more legible than mine.
All right. There you go.
And actually, you guys each can get one of these pens.
Congratulations for doing this.
Here you go.
Thank you.
And you have plenty of presidential pens.
(LAUGHTER)
REAGAN: Thank you.
OBAMA: God bless you.
Thank you, everybody.
SANCHEZ: That's a nice moment. It's like -- well, my colleague Candy Crowley maybe said it best just a little while ago. She said it was the coming together of the new and the old, in this case as well, a Republican -- the first lady of a Republican president with the present Democratic president of the United States.
Let me just tell you what they have just done -- or what the president has just done. He's created a commission to plan and coordinate the activities for what's going to happen in 2011, honoring the former president on the anniversary of what would have been his 100th birthday.
Candy, what did you think? It was cool to watch, wasn't it?
CROWLEY: It was. It was very sweet, actually, you know, the way she held onto his arm when they walked in. It was a nice picture.
It did occur to me, though, as I was watching that, that as admiring as President Obama was, at least technically, of the Reagan revolution, he's pretty much undoing that revolution. I mean, this was -- the Reagan administration was lower taxes, smaller government, stronger military. That was the trio of the mantra.
And this is a very different administration now that is moving in a different direction from the Reagan era. But it was a nice coming together and a recognition that Ronald Reagan, despite the fact that some people didn't like his policies, was a well-liked president.
SANCHEZ: Well, you know, interestingly enough, thematically it seemed like the president was trying to steal some of that. I mean, he mentioned optimism. Remember the "Morning in America" line that none of us will ever forget. And he talked about him working together at the time with Tip O'Neill, for example.
CROWLEY: Absolutely.
SANCHEZ: Down to 20 seconds, but take us out.
CROWLEY: Well, I mean, there was no doubt that President Reagan -- again, there were just people that didn't really like his policies, thought they were undermining what the U.S. stood for, and they really liked him. He was a very genial, very gracious man.
SANCHEZ: Your colleague, Wolf Blitzer, standing by now to take us into the next hour.
My thanks to you. Here's Wolf.
