Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

President Obama Visits Saudi Arabia; Osama bin Laden on Obama; LULAC Responds to Tom DeLay's Comments

Aired June 03, 2009 - 15:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): A Muslim conversion, and this one happens during an attempt at robbery. Give me all your money, and praise be Allah? Huh?

Should this judge continue to get a six-figure salary after what he did?

CATHY MCBROOM, FEDERAL CASE MANAGER: I was trying to fight him off and keep his hands away from my body parts.

QUESTION: What do you think of the fact that two prominent conservatives have called you a racist?

SANCHEZ: Her lips were sealed when CNN asked her about the racism comments from him and him. Now a mea culpa from Newt Gingrich.

REP. TOM DELAY (R), FORMER HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: This whole debate about Sotomayor's being Hispanic or Latina is -- is racist in itself.

SANCHEZ: Tom DeLay on this show pouring gasoline on the GOP rift with Hispanic organizations. I will give LULAC a chance to respond.

And President Obama in Saudi Arabia. How does he convince Arabs to hate Israel less?

And guess who has a message for the president today? That guy. And we got it.

Our national conversation for Wednesday, June 3, starts right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: And hello again, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez.

We're in New York today with the next generation of news. Let's be clear. This is a conversation. That's the way we like to do it. It's not a speech. And it's your turn to get involved. Stand by the way.

I'm going to be talking to you about the Middle East in just a little bit, but what can only be described as really a gambit by the president of the United States, President Barack Obama. This is the start of his effort to try and mend America's image among moderate Arabs, Arabs of good faith, should we say?

We have got Christiane Amanpour, who is going to be joining us to guide us through this conversation, this very important time for this American president, who has, at least to a certain extent, most would argue, distinguished himself among other past presidents, at least in this particular arena. Good or bad or indifferent, that's another conversation.

He is trying to reestablish America's role in an elusive peace process as well. Stay with me for that. We're going to get into that in just a little bit.

But there's another story that has been going on today that I really want to share with you, and here's why. This has enormous significance for the judiciary of the United States. These are impeachment proceedings that are going on, on Capitol Hill that we have been moderating all day long against a standing federal judge, or he was.

This is Judge Samuel Kent. He's headed to prison, by the way. This judge is going to prison after rampant abuses of his office, to say the very least. You will cringe when you hear what this judge is accused of doing in his office, using his status as a superior.

Today, two of his victims testified, including the federal case manager who finally blew the whistle. This is a woman who worked under him. I want you to listen to part of this testimony for yourself.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCBROOM: He started trying to undress me, take my clothes off. He yanked up my shirt, my sweater that I was wearing. This time, my breast was exposed, and he -- he did put his mouth on my breast. At some point, he -- he pushed my head down towards his crotch.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: This is, to say the very least, a deeply sad and shocking story that we have been following. We first brought you this story about a month ago. We're certainly going to have a lot more for you on this story later. Ashleigh Banfield will be my guest. She's going to be joining us to bring us the ins and outs of this story and how it could end up affecting not only the people who work for him, but the judicial system itself and this judge.

And we're also going to tell you why the house is moving to impeach this judge, Samuel Kent, when he's already headed to prison. Now, that's all part of the story that you may not believe as we bring it to you.

But there's something else I want to bring -- bring to your attention right now. This is probably the most important story when you look at the United States' role in the world. It's the president of the United States doing what he may be more qualified to do than many presidents before him, because of who he is, because of his stature. That's important to keep under consideration.

He seems to be -- and this is generally speaking -- trying to convince the world's Muslims to hate Israel less, while trying to get Israel to go along with a plan. That in and of itself is a tightrope, before you throw into the equation what Republicans are going to be saying about this president here at home.

So, think about all the triads that are going on there, all the parts of this equation. And there's more. While the president arrives in Riyadh, Osama bin Laden is sending this president a message. That is not at all welcoming, by the way. It's not like, welcome to the Arab world, Mr. President.

He's telling Muslims that this president or seems to be telling them that this president is really no different than the last. Here's a snippet. This is from Al-Jazeera, by the way. This is from the Al- Jazeera network. I want you to listen to it.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

OSAMA BIN LADEN, AL QAEDA LEADER (through translator): Obama and his administration put new seeds of hatred and revenge against America. The number of these seeds is the same as the number of those victims and refugees in Swat and the tribal areas in northern and southern Waziristan.

This way, Obama proved that he's walking the same road of his predecessors to build enmity against Muslims and increase the number of fighters against the U.S., while establishing more lasting wars.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: All right, let's do this. Let's cut right to the chase here.

Few journalists know this story as well or better than our chief international correspondent, Christiane Amanpour. She's good enough to join me now to -- to really take us through this.

Let's start with the last part first. The fact that Osama bin Laden would put out this statement while the president of the United States arrives there, how does the president or does he even need to combat this sentiment where Osama bin Laden seems to be trying to rile up the Arab world against the president of the United States?

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's more of the same from Osama bin Laden. This is something like the third audiotape that he's released this year alone.

The first one was in January, when he was railing against Israel and the U.S. for supporting Israel during the Gaza war. Then he came out with another one in March. And now he's come out with this one, which is all about Pakistan and the U.S. support for Pakistan and what's been going on in the Swat area, as the Pakistani army has been trying to regain and retake it from al Qaeda and from the Taliban. SANCHEZ: Well, let me ask you this question. Do you think there are those certainly moderates in the Arab world who are going to look at this and say, why are you going after this guy so soon? After all, he does have Hussein as a middle name. He has tried to sound conciliatory toward us -- toward us. He has been a little harder on Israel than past presidents have been.

Do you think this will have blowback for Osama bin Laden, something we haven't seen him experience in an awful long time?

AMANPOUR: You know, many analysts are saying that Osama bin Laden is not as effective as he used to be.

And if you look at the polls around the area, for instance, in Afghanistan or in Pakistan or elsewhere, incredibly, extremism, the kind that we saw spike amongst the general population right after 9/11, is coming down.

That's a very significant fact. While there are hotbeds of it, as we have seen the Taliban gain strength in both Pakistan and Afghanistan, it doesn't mean to say it's infecting the population.

And that is incredibly important, particularly at a time when a new U.S. president has decided to try to open a new chapter with the Muslim world, and, as one analyst said here on CNN, to try to take America back to its relations with the Muslim world that were pre- 9/11.

SANCHEZ: But at the expense perhaps of our relationship with Israel, and here's where it gets interesting. If -- does the president of the United States either have to lean on Bibi Netanyahu or have to been seen perceptively as leaning on Bibi Netanyahu to have success in the Arab world?

AMANPOUR: The president of the United States is not reacting to a tape from Osama bin Laden, one would think.

However, he also knows what all Muslims and Arabs know, and that is that the issue of Palestine, in other words, an independent homeland free and democratic for the Palestinians, is something that is of supreme importance amongst the Islamic world, in the Islamic world, and increasingly in Europe, in Israel, even in the United States and elsewhere.

So, what the president is -- is going to say and what he's been doing, he's basically put forth, again, America's policy, which is that the United States does not approve of settlements and wants to see settlements in all shape and form, whether there are new settlements...

SANCHEZ: And it's a clear disagreement with Netanyahu.

AMANPOUR: Well, he has said that exactly to the new prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently in a very fragile coalition with very conservative and right-wing parties and elements in Israel himself. So, Netanyahu has said, no, we're going to allow for natural growth. That's a code for expanding existing settlements. And we're not going to stop that.

And the latest out of Israel is that his coalition partners are saying, no, you will not stop that, or else we are going to collapse the government.

So, he's in that position. But, beyond that, Prime Minister Netanyahu also does not agree with a key plank in American policy platform, and that is the two-state solution.

SANCHEZ: A two-state solution, yes.

AMANPOUR: So, yes, right now, early on in President Obama's administration, there is a very public difference, if not confrontation, between Israel and the United States.

However, it does not mean to say that the United States or Obama is any less committed to Israel than any other president.

SANCHEZ: And that's interesting the way it will play out. I wonder if he will play off that perception, even if it means being somewhat Machiavellian, as this -- as this Kabuki dance, if we can call it that, continues.

We will be watching. And we have in you one of the best to watch it for us. Christiane Amanpour, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

To the surveillance video that has gotten our attention -- I want you to look at this. This accused robber drops to his knees, begging for forgiveness, but it's what happens after that gets really bizarre. I'm going to show it to you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thanks for coming.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're not going to have (INAUDIBLE) yet.

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Now, are Democrats preventing Sonia Sotomayor from speaking for herself? Why doesn't she respond to legitimate journalistic questions?

And then Newt Gingrich does the honorable thing. I will tell you what it is.

Oh, and the blowback continues from Hispanic organizations. Now, apparently, they're going after Tom DeLay's comments that he made to me here on this show just several days ago. I'm going to share that with you as well.

There's a lot going on. Stay right there.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hey, Rick. This is Carol Ann (ph) calling from South Carolina.

I just want to let you know that Newt Gingrich really isn't sorry about Sotomayor. He's only doing that to save face. And I know you will call him on it.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Nice digs, huh? I'm Rick Sanchez. We're here at the world headquarters of Time Warner, bringing you this newscast today.

By the way, the less said may be the better. That's sage advice dolled out to Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in her second day of meet-and-greets with senators on Capitol Hill today, which at times resembles something, well, superficial. Let's call it what it is.

Watch and listen closely to the response that our CNN field producer, Ted Barrett, gets when he's asking Judge Sotomayor for thoughts on Newt Gingrich's recent backpedaling on her "Latina rich with life experiences" comment.

Let's -- let's just hear this out ourselves. Go ahead. Play that, if you can.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Newt Gingrich has retracted his statement in a sense, calling the judge a racist.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think that's...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK, guys.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you. No questions today. Thank you so much.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you for coming.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right, guys, let's go.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you for the opportunity. Thank you so much.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you. Thanks for coming.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're not going to (INAUDIBLE) yet.

(LAUGHTER) (END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: You get the feeling she's being handled? I'm not sure they're doing her any favors. We are going to have more on Newt Gingrich's surprising mea culpa, by the way, with Patricia Murphy. She is going to be joining us to talk about this a little later in the hour.

Lots going on. Stay with.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, Rick. Chase (ph) from New York.

I don't know if you read that Newt Gingrich apology, but I didn't see read apologies there. Say what he says, not what he says he says.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: On more than one level, this is aptly described as a horror story.

I want you to try and imagine this, all right? The man who runs your office is a bit of a drunkard. Not just that -- he's also a bit of a boar. And while he's on the job, repeatedly, he forces himself upon you and tells you to keep your mouth shut. And you know what I mean by forces himself upon you. We want to keep it as clean as we can, because there may be some of your kids in the room right now. So, we will -- we will speak in those terms, OK?

And this happens. This happens again and again and again. And then you go and you tell your supervisor about what this guy is doing. And what does the supervisor say? She says, just keep your mouth shut. Don't cross him.

If that's all too common, well, then this part isn't, because it gets worse. This -- this guy, this person, this boss that I'm talking about was a United States district judge. His name is Sam Kent. And, for 17 years, this big monster of a man, Kent, was the only federal judge in Galveston, Texas. And he ran that district like it was his own little personal fiefdom.

No one was willing to cross this guy, Kent, this judge, until one woman finally did, and then another. In less than two weeks, Sam Kent is going to prison. But, believe it or not, he's still a federal judge. So, the House Judiciary Committee today launched a hearing about this judge's actions and heard from two of his victims.

I want you to listen now, carefully, if you would, to Donna Wilkerson and Cathy McBroom.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCBROOM: And he pulled up my blouse. He got his hand underneath my bra and pulled everything up at once, so that my breasts were exposed.

I was begging him to stop, telling him: "Please don't do this to me. Please don't. I really love my job. I don't want to lose my job. Please don't do this."

He wouldn't listen. I was trying to fight him off and keep his hands away from my body parts. He also put his hand down, tried to force his hand down my skirt. And I noticed that the door to the small -- small room that we were in was cracked open.

And I knew that the security guards must be able to hear what was going in there. And I even said: "Judge, the guards are right outside. I know they can hear us."

And he said, "I don't care who hears us."

He wasn't afraid of that at all. And that even made me more frightened. I guess he felt like, you know, he was powerful enough that no one was going to approach him, and no one was going to come and come to my rescue. And he was right.

DONNA WILKERSON, KENT'S SECRETARY: These episodes always occurred inside of his chambers, sometimes in his office and sometimes in the reception area or wherever in chambers he could corner me.

Preceding the incidents, he would always begin speaking in a vulgar and inappropriate way to me and telling me graphically what he wanted to do to me. During these episodes, I repeatedly told him: "No. Stop. Stop acting like a pig. Quit. Cut this out. You can't -- we can't be doing this. I don't want to do this. Behave yourself," and so on and so on.

There were times he would approach me -- approach me from behind while I was sitting at my desk and working at my computer. He would quickly come up behind me and put his hands over my shoulders and grope me on the outside of my clothes, and then down my shirt and into my bra.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: If you're mad when you watch that, you should be, Donna Wilkerson and Cathy McBroom testifying today about federal Judge Sam Kent.

And joining me now here in New York is Ashleigh Banfield of "Open Court."

Ashleigh, always good to see you.

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, TRUTV ANCHOR: Hi. Nice to see you here in New York.

SANCHEZ: You know...

BANFIELD: Unbelievable. SANCHEZ: ... I watched in stunned silence as those women told their stories, and especially because, the more they spoke, the more you got a sense of how defenseless they seemed to be, that they had to take this. And that's not right in America.

BANFIELD: Look, a lot of women over the decades that they have been working in office environments have suffered this kind of fate.

But very few are in the kind of power structure that this federal judge held. So, it was even more difficult for them to come forward and seek some kind of assistance for what they were going through. That's where it all started.

SANCHEZ: Is this an impeachable offense? We know it's criminally prosecutable. In fact, he has been prosecuted. But is it an impeachable offense? Should he no longer receive any of his pay?

BANFIELD: Well, here's what the impeachable offense would be, not so much the sexual assault, though I dare say that a conviction, a felony conviction for a federal judge for sexual assault should be.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Yes.

BANFIELD: But, without question, obstruction of justice and making false statements, which he did to the investigative body of the 5th Circuit...

SANCHEZ: So, that's what it is? It's not the fact...

BANFIELD: You bet.

SANCHEZ: ... that he's grotesque?

BANFIELD: Well, he's grotesque and I think his reputation will suffer because of what he's done.

But he pleaded. And in the plea bargain, he got one count of obstruction of justice for making those false statements. And they did away with the sexual assault charges.

SANCHEZ: But you're -- you're telling me if he had been nailed on this and maybe even not prosecuted, but everyone known that he had done it, if he had to go before this very same board, they wouldn't be able to impeach him unless they had the goods criminally, like you state?

BANFIELD: Yes, felonious behavior is not the kind of thing befitting of a federal judge. That's pretty bad...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: ... overall.

SANCHEZ: How does this compare to some of the other relevant cases that are going on right now, Blagojevich, for example?

BANFIELD: Well, what's interesting about this, and, you know...

SANCHEZ: He's impeached or...

BANFIELD: And bam.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

BANFIELD: That was a -- that was a no-brainer, and there wasn't anybody who dissented in that vote in that senate.

SANCHEZ: So, the standard there was even lower, I would think.

BANFIELD: Here's the standard. It's your own individual standard as a senator or as a congressman in this particular case.

SANCHEZ: Congressman.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: There's no preponderance of the evidence. There's no reasonable doubt. It's, hey, how do I feel about this? I'm a voting member of this body, and, if I don't like it, I'm going to go against this and impeach this fellow.

Listen, he pleaded. He's admitted to doing it. He's admitted to obstruction of justice, federal judge's obstruction of justice, and making false statements. It's not going to be a really tough vote. And so, by the way, another statistic you have got to know, just about every federal judge who has got some kind of felonious conviction like this has either been impeached or resigned.

The resignation here is what's so troubling, though.

SANCHEZ: Banfield and Sanchez together on set again. Good to see you.

BANFIELD: Just like the old days.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Ashleigh, thanks.

BANFIELD: Sure.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: I don't think you're agreeing with Tancredo, but you're coming darned close.

DELAY: No, don't do that to me. That's not fair.

SANCHEZ: Well, wait a minute, wait a minute. You said La Raza is a leftist organization that doesn't in any way represent Hispanics?

DELAY: Yes, does not represent the majority of Hispanics that I know in Texas. That's for sure. (END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: OK, that's my conversation. You may have had heard it. If not, you will be able to hear it again. And it's very relevant today.

GOP power player, Tom DeLay, he calls LULAC a radical leftist organization that doesn't represent Hispanics. As you might imagine, LULAC wants a chance to respond to what he had to say. And we're going to give them that opportunity.

By the way, Tom Tancredo, who was critical of Sotomayor's race, has an aide who is now accused of a racist comment. And this one is blatant. You are -- he's admitting to it, by the way. You're going to hear it in full and the rest of the story.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, Rick. It's Justin (ph) from Boca.

I think I could give a better newscast than you because I'm white. Now, don't you think that's a little racist? Come on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: And we welcome you back. I'm Rick Sanchez here in the world headquarters of Time Warner in Columbus Circle in New York.

Remember my interview with Tom Tancredo? Most people do because it made headlines all over the country, when he asserted on this show that Sonia Sotomayor is a racist because she associates with what he deems -- he deems -- a racist organization. That organization, La Raza, soundly refuted the charge, but it was good to hear the former congressman and immigration opponent be so concerned about racism, and that he thinks people should be condemned for being racist or associating with racists.

Now this -- it turns out that Tom Tancredo has some explaining to do on this very front, because the executive director of his political action committee -- his political action committee -- has admitted to a blatantly racist act.

It's now revealed that, in 2007, this man, Marcus Epstein, according to a Secret Service witness, came out of a bar in Washington, called a woman the N-word, and then slapped her in the head, slapped her in the head. He fled the scene. But he was eventually arrested.

Epstein, who is due back in court next month, is blaming his behavior on too much alcohol. But, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, it's more than that. They have described Epstein as a man with a network of racist connections.

Back to Tancredo now, who said on this show people who associate with racist organizations are racists.

Congressman, why is Mr. Epstein still in charge of your political organization? And what, sir, does that say about you?

We got in touch with Tancredo. He declined to answer our questions yesterday repeatedly.

Up next, a spokesperson for LULAC responds to the comments Tom DeLay made on this program when he called their organization leftist and radical.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: And we welcome you back.

You know, this show has been making a lot of news recently. It started obviously with that Tom Tancredo interview. I think you remember what Tom Tancredo had to say that's made all the headlines and been talked about on all the Sunday morning shows.

But then just a couple of days after I reached out to former speaker (sic) Tom DeLay, and the question I wanted to ask him was whether someone should stand up in the Republican Party and say, guys, let's look for some moderation here, let's stop sounding so vehement about Sonia Sotomayor? I honestly, cross my heart, expected that Tom DeLay would take up that role.

Instead, to my surprise, he went the other way, and during our interview began sounding off against not just Sonia Sotomayor, but the two biggest Hispanic activist organizations in the United States.

Here, take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM DELAY (R), FMR. HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: La Raza and LULAC don't speak for the Hispanics that I know, and they're a bunch of radical leftists that try to make the world believe that they speak for Hispanics.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Well, our phones started hooking right after -- our phones started ringing off the hook right after a lot of folks heard that -- pardon me. The other side obviously wanting to be heard. And to remain as journalistically sound as we try to be, we want to give them an opportunity now to respond to that, because they weren't here at the time that charge was made.

Brent Wilkes, he's the national director of LULAC. And he's good enough to join us now.

Mr. Wilkes, I bet you were taken aback when you heard that. BRENT WILKES, NATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, LULAC: We were outraged by that comment, Rick, because it's just flat-out wrong. Tom DeLay doesn't know what he's talking about.

LULAC is a mainstream organization. We represent 115,000 Hispanics-Americans from all walks of lives, including Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives. And we have been supportive of Hispanics to the judiciary, whether they're Republican or Democrat, including Miguel Estrada, which Tom DeLay seems to thinks we weren't. But we were there. He wasn't, by the way.

We supported Miguel Estrada. I don't remember Tom DeLay going out of his way to help Miguel Estrada. Now we've got a wonderful justice in Sonia Sotomayor. She's eminently qualified, really a pretty moderate justice, and we are supporting her as well. And for that we get attacked by a man called Tom DeLay.

That was unnecessary, and we are outraged.

SANCHEZ: Why would he do that? I mean, what's going on here? For what reason would he want to create this rift or this void between an Hispanic organization like your own, which I'm sure your organization can be criticized for positions you've held in the past, we all could. But his point seemed to be broader than that.

Can you apply any kind of motive to it?

WILKES: You know, I don't think there's any rational motive to it. He is really hurting the Republican Party if that's who he represents, because they desperately...

SANCHEZ: But why would he do that? Look, it doesn't make any sense.

Why would a guy like Tom DeLay -- and you heard Newt Gingrich apologize today. Why would they hate the party that they used to be such -- not hate the party -- pardon me, I misspoke -- the party that they used to be a part of? They're creating a problem for the guys who are wearing that "R" after their names now who are trying to get elected, aren't they?

WILKES: All I can think is that they miss the limelight, they are trying to get back in it by saying something outrageous. And you know, I think there's a hidden bias in these folks.

I mean, it's shocking to hear what happened with Tancredo and his political action committee director. These folks may have been harboring all this time an animosity towards minority communities, and it's scary to think that they were at the center of power here in Washington.

SANCHEZ: Finally -- well, you know, again, let's be fair about this. A lot of the guys who are in the GOP right now, they were on the Sunday morning talk shows, they have been very moderate about this. And while not necessarily being highly critical of the guys who have made these statements, they're not endorsing them in any way, shape, or form. So let's not -- let's not be Republican beater-uppers here while we're doing this.

Do you want an apology from him? Have you reached out to him and said, you, sir, owe my organization an apology?

WILKES: You know what? I don't think I want an apology from him. What we do want to have is to have the mainstream other Republican Party distance themselves from these guys, tell them to back off and shut up. I mean, the problem is...

SANCHEZ: You don't think they've done that enough?

WILKES: I don't think so, not at all. And I've watched those Sunday shows. And Rick, I don't think they distanced themselves. This is offensive material.

SANCHEZ: Well, McConnell says, "Look, it's not my job to be speech police." That's what he said.

WILKES: They have to guard their brand. The Republican brand is an important brand for them, and they are letting these guys pollute it with really discrimination and a very strong animosity towards Latinos. That's going to hurt them and he's got to defend that brand and he's got to be more aggressive.

You know, I do have to give credit to John Cornyn. He did step up and say...

SANCHEZ: Yes, he did.

WILKES: ... let's have a civil discourse. The rest of them haven't been as aggressive. They need to say, you know what? If they want to say those kinds of things, they're not in our party anymore.

SANCHEZ: Well, let's leave it as this -- and I think this is probably the best thing that we can do, that I can do as the host of this newscast every day -- any opportunity will be accepted here on this show for anyone who can represent the party fairly to come forward and say, this is what our position needs to be, and this is what we need to tell people who may be acting a little too vehemently and saying things that aren't going over very well with organizations like your own.

Brent Wilkes, you got a chance to respond. There it is.

WILKES: Thanks, Rick.

SANCHEZ: National Executive Director of LULAC.

We thank you, sir, for taking the time to talk to us.

It's one of the most unusual convenience store surveillance tapes that I've ever seen. Why does this accused robber appear to start praying? Now, you got to hear what the clerk did to get him on his knees. This is an amazing story.

And then Newt Gingrich -- talk about honorable -- he's changes his tune on that word "racism" referring to Sonia Sotomayor. He's doing what most would consider, certainly I would consider, the right thing. He's manning up.

Patricia Murphy's going to join me to talk about this.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

LOU: Hey, Rick, Lou from Connecticut. It's quite amazing what maybe a few days of clarity will do for someone like Newt Gingrich realizing that he stuck his foot in his mouth, all the way up to his hips. I'm glad he's recanted what he's said, but it still does not put a good image on a Republican Party that is still way out to the right.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: And we welcome you back.

Finding religion at the end of a gun barrel. Take a look at this attempted robbery. This is in Long Island.

Baseball bat, I want you to meet shotgun, because that's about what's going to happen here. This video coming out today.

It happened last month. He wants the money; right? The guy who just came into that store.

The shopkeeper offers to fill him full of lead. Watch what he does. There's the shopkeeper. That's right, that's a shotgun he's got in his hand, and he's coming around.

Now, look, the strangest thing suddenly happens here. Keep watching this video. He begs the storeowner, a Muslim, by the way, not to shoot him. He says he's broke, his family is poor, he's hungry, he needs money.

The storeowner forgives him and then hands him $40. And watch as he's leaving. He's going to grab a loaf of bread and then he gets kicked out of the store. Then the suspect said he asked the storeowner to convert him to a Muslim, and he does.

This is so strange. No word on how that's going, by the way.

There's the loaf of bread he's grabbing. We just thought you'd like to know.

All right. When I come back, should the president of the United States be telling Benjamin Netanyahu what to do about Israeli settlements?

A full report from the Middle East when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) SANCHEZ: Let's talk about something that's becoming a bit of a critical talking point that's coming out of our nation's capital. Is the president of the United States alienating Israel? What is the real strategy here?

And here's why I'm asking that question. If you look at the president's travel itinerary this week, one of the things you're going to recognize there's no Air Force One stop that's scheduled for Israel, a point some of Obama's critics have quickly seized upon prior to the president's speech in Cairo.

And what is the political risk that the president has taken in going against the conventional grain of longstanding U.S. foreign policy? I mean, think about that, if he's coming at this from a contrarian perspective.

He's already being criticized on the right for leaning too heavily on Benjamin Netanyahu on the settlement issue. We've heard that.

Few have more command of this subject than my colleague, Wolf Blitzer, who's good enough to join us now from Washington, D.C.

Wolf, always good to see you.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you, Rick.

SANCHEZ: You know, the president may be the most -- you could make an argument he's one of the most conciliatory presidents, in theme, if nothing else, than we've had since, let's say, Jimmy Carter. And meanwhile, he has the most relentlessly hawkish prime minister that Israel has had that he's going up against since, well, Benjamin Netanyahu.

What does this make for? What does this promise to be like as you and I watch this develop?

BLITZER: It promises for some exciting diplomacy, some potential political tensions there between the United States and Israel. But then again, maybe not.

I remember there were a lot of the same fears way, way, back in 1977, '78, '79, when Menachem Begin, the Likud leader, became the prime minister of Israel. For the first time, the Likud taking charge of Israel, getting rid of the Labor Party, which had been in charge all of those years.

And what happened? There was the Camp David Accords. Anwar Sadat, the leader of Egypt, went to Jerusalem. And after many months of negotiations, finally there was an Israeli/Egyptian peace treaty all under the watch of Jimmy Carter.

There were some tense moments there between the U.S. and Israel where there were some disagreements, some tense moments in the years that followed. But there could be some tense moments right now. Fundamentally, though, I think it's fair to say the U.S./Israeli relationship is pretty solid and they'll get through this.

SANCHEZ: Let me -- you know, I was goes to go to that Ed Henry report, but instead, I want to ask you this question, because it's something that I've been thinking about throughout the course of the day as I've been watching some of these reports coming out, including the one filed by Ed Henry.

You and I remember that Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon used to play this Mutt and Jeff routine, good guy/bad guy, be careful because I never know what he's going to say, and he's worse than I am. Is it possible that even if nothing else from a Machiavellian standpoint, form a perception standpoint, this president can, with a wink and a nod, tell Benjamin Netanyahu, who knows he has to support this country, Wolf, at least be perceived to, look, I'm going to come down hard on you, I want the Arabs to hear me castigate you from time to time, because if I don't do that, we are not going to be able to find some middle ground between you two?

Is that a possibility or is that crazy?

BLITZER: It's not crazy. I think what's telling was this interview that the president gave Thomas Friedman, "The New York Times" columnist. And Tom Friedman writes about it in "The New York Times" today.

The president saying, look, I just want to tell the world, I just want to say publicly what I'm saying privately to the leaders of Israel, to the leaders of the Palestinian community, to the leaders of the Arab world. I want to play a separate game, be tough in private, but then speak differently publicly. And I think that's very telling.

I think that's what he's going to try to do. And we'll see if it scores some results.

My suspicion is if he's going according to his game plan, what he was supposed to be doing with the Saudi King Abdullah today is try to lean on him to make a gesture toward the Israelis, establish some sort of dialogue, some sort of minute relationship, if you will. That would be very powerful and reassuring a lot of nervous Israelis that, yes, it's time for a two-state solution, yes, it's time to free settlements, which is precisely what President Obama would like to see.

SANCHEZ: Always enjoy talking to you, Wolf. Your experience shows in every conversation. My thanks to you.

BLITZER: Thanks, Rick.

SANCHEZ: I want to read what Newt Gingrich wrote on Twitter just a couple of days ago. Here's the quote: "White man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw."

And now Newt Gingrich says he should not have called Judge Sotomayor a racist. Why the shift? And how does this affect the tone of the GOP? Patricia Murphy joins me next to pick up this conversation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ALINA CHO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Phylicia Rashad may be best known for her 1980s role as TV's favorite mom, Clair Huxtable in "The Cosby Show."

PHYLICIA RASHAD, ACTRESS, "THE COSBY SHOW": Cliff, listen to yourself.

CHO: The sitcom was considered groundbreaking in its portrayal of an upper middle class African-American family.

Nearly two decades later, Rashad is breaking ground again, this time on Broadway. The 60-year-old actress plays Violet Weston in the Pulitzer Prize-winning play "August: Osage County," a drug-addicted mother in a dysfunctional family. The move to cast Rashad is unusual, and it's making headlines, because all of her relatives in the play are white.

RASHAD: I didn't know what to feel. It gets old.

CHO (on camera): And how did you feel?

RASHAD: I didn't know how to respond, because it was so unexpected.

CHO (voice-over): One scholar of African-American theater calls it a significant step and a sign of the times.

HARRY ELAM, STANFORD UNIVERSITY DRAMA DEPT.: In this age of Obama things are opening up, and opening up possibility. And so this allows producers to think outside the box.

CHO: There have been plays in the cast that have been recast with actors of a different race than the playwright originally intended. But that's usually involved all of the actors, like "On Golden Pond" and "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof," which also featured Rashad.

The actress downplays the significance of playing the matriarch in an all-white family.

(on camera): Do you look at this role as being groundbreaking as well?

RASHAD: I'm an actor doing my work. That's how I see it. I'm an actor doing my work.

CHO (voice-over): Will audiences buy it?

ELAM: Theater is built on the convention of disbelief, that you will accept something when you walk into the theater. So you can see an actor playing a dog, a chair, and you'll accept that for the time you're in the theater.

CHO (on camera): Is your hope that there will be more Violet Westons cast who look more like you?

RASHAD: My hope is that it won't matter. That is my hope. And my hope is that we really put the tomato in our shoe and catch up, and that it won't matter.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back.

I want to do something now. Let's go ahead and use this big board. I want to check the Twitter board. The Twitter board is a little bigger here in New York than it is in Atlanta.

Let's go to the fourth one down. You see the one there that says "Mr. Eight (ph)?"

"Sotomayor isn't a racist," it says, "she's Latina. Those who call her racist should provide evidence or be considered racists themselves."

Now look at the one just under that right there that says "The Cat Chaser." "Newt is the racist, and no matter how he recants his statement, it's been heard and his apology is not genuine."

Now, I've got to tell you, as far as I'm concerned, reading that statement -- and with all due respect to all of you who send us these tweets -- and I certainly appreciate, because we try and make this show a conversation -- I'm not sure that's fair. I'm not sure that's fair to do or say about someone who is seemingly -- and you have to take people at their word -- genuinely apologizing.

Newt Gingrich is doing what honorable people do. When they say something that they wish that they hadn't, they apologize and they try and move on. And that is exactly what the former House speaker is doing after calling Sonia Sotomayor a racist last week.

I mean, let's think about this.

First, let's go to his Web site. "With critics who want to have an honest conversation, I agree." This is what Newt Gingrich is saying. "The word 'racist' should not have been applied to Judge Sotomayor as a person, even if her words themselves are unacceptable..."

Should this be seen as anything other than a bona fide, honest and transparent apology?

That's what Patricia Murphy gets to answer because we're calling on Patricia right now.

Murph, good to see you. PATRICIA MURPHY, COLUMNIST, POLITICSDAILY.COM: Good to see you.

SANCHEZ: What do you make of this?

MURPHY: Well, I'll tell you, I've read it, I read his entire statement. I wouldn't exactly call it an apology. He did say he shouldn't have used the word "racist" to talk about her personally, but then he does go on and raise his objections to her and says that he still objects to the way that she views the law through the lens of a Latina.

So, it's not quite an apology. It is a clarification. That is important.

It has put a lot of Republicans in a real box though. They can't get away from this fast enough.

SANCHEZ: But no -- but wait. Let's you and I take this up a little bit. You know that we like to mingle a little bit from time to time, you and I.

The man essentially is saying that if you just take her at her word -- and by the way, Democrats haven't exactly been asking Sotomayor to explain what she meant either. In fact, they have been handling her and shutting her up. We watched the video today. So, what are you left with but her own words?

And if you take her own words literally -- I know if you read what she said before and you read what she said after, it could mean a lot of different things. But if you just take that paragraph literally, Newt Gingrich is right, what she's saying can be taken as someone saying I am better than you. Calling her a racist, wrong. Criticizing that line, perfectly acceptable. Is it not?

MURPHY: Well, yes, there is a difference between saying something through the lens of race and having nefarious purposes and believing that somebody is a racist. So, in that way, he clarified his -- he did clarify his points.

Again, it's too late though for Republicans on the Hill. They can't get away from this fast enough, and it's backfiring because Democrats are saying now we're going to speed this process up, we're going to hurry these hearings up because we're not going to let her be out there getting beat up without responding to it.

SANCHEZ: But it's important for Newt Gingrich to do this because he needs to distance himself from Rush Limbaugh and Tom Tancredo and Tom DeLay and say, look, I'm a lot closer to the inside than those guys are.

MURPHY: Yes. And he is a serious person. He's a serious policy-minded person.

He knew that this was damaging not just himself, but all Republicans. If Republicans want to win the next time around, they're going to have to do much, much better with minorities, including Hispanics. And they only got a third of the vote last time around. They're not going to do any better if this keeps up.

SANCHEZ: You know, it's going to be interesting to watch this thing. I had a friend I used to work with, Sally Fitz (ph), who told me when she watched the Clarence Thomas hearings, ,that she was appalled as a woman. And let us hope that the same thing doesn't happen to Hispanics when they watch the Sotomayor hearings as well. But no one can predict, but we'll wait and see.

All right. Thanks so much. Always so great to see you, Murph.

MURPHY: Thanks, Rick.

SANCHEZ: Wolf Blitzer standing by now with "THE SITUATION ROOM."