Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

North Korea Sentences U.S. Journalists to 12 Years in Prison; New Air France Crash Clues; New Labor Numbers & the Administration's Economic Plan

Aired June 08, 2009 - 15:00   ET

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

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: And hello again, everybody. Welcome back.

I'm Rick Sanchez with the next generation of news. This is a conversation, certainly not a speech, and it is your turn to get involved.

Here is the story this newscast and you, the viewers, have been very involved with recently. Ever since journalist Laura Ling appeared on this show live from Seoul, South Korea, and was then mysteriously arrested by North Korea just days later, you have asked us to stay on top of this story, and we have.

But, today, the news on the story is not good. Ling and her producer, Euna Lee, have been sentenced to 12 years of hard labor. What you are seeing right there is my interview with Ling on Friday, March 13. And here is what I can tell you about it, without further compromising her well-being at this point.

She talked to us from a hotel room in Seoul on that day, in South Korea, where we have since learned from subsequent reports that she was working on a story about human trafficking. We were not interviewing her about that, that day.

We were interviewing her about a story that wasn't related. Her arrest was made official by the North Korean government March 17 for allegedly crossing into the country illegally, which was originally denied by Current TV and her family. This is her sister.

This is Lisa Ling just a few days ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LISA LING, JOURNALIST: What we just want to say that, when the girls left the United States, they never intended to cross into North Korean soil. And, if they did at any point, we apologize, and we know that they are -- are very, very sorry.

And we ask that you show mercy today and take into consideration that they have families back in America that love and miss them desperately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: All right, that's her message to the North Korean government.

As reported, Ling was working on a story about human trafficking that allegedly occurs on a river that separates China from North Korea. Let's -- let's show that map, if we possibly can. There's the river right there. This -- this is where they are all alleged to have crossed.

And that is where they were supposedly arrested as well, all except for a cameraman, incidentally, who did get away.

Joining me now, John Park. He's senior research associate at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

Mr. Park, thank you so much for being with us, sir.

JOHN PARK, SENIOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATE, U.S. INSTITUTE OF PEACE: Glad to be here.

SANCHEZ: We have just received information that the South Korean president will meet with President Barack Obama in mid-June. He will visit the White House, we understand. What do you expect could possibly come of this, if anything?

PARK: There's a hope right now to exhaust all different avenues to secure the release of the two U.S. journalists. So, certainly a meeting at the highest level between the United States and South Korea is one step in that direction. But, right now, we're trying to piece together exactly what this all means.

The verdict did come down. They will be sentenced to 12 years. But what type of options are available...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Well, hold on. I'm going to stop you. Let me stop you real quick.

PARK: Sure.

SANCHEZ: What does that mean, 12 years hard labor? Can you describe to us what that means from a North Korean perspective, so we can understand it?

PARK: The North Koreans specifically said reform through labor. And that's a different type of nuance that seems to suggest that it will be different from the brutally harsh labor camps that we are well aware of, so this reform through labor is a term that we have to clarify.

SANCHEZ: Well, can you clarify it for us? Can you help us understand what it would be like to be imprisoned in North Korea? What can they expect to experience?

PARK: There are different types. For North Korean citizens, the unfortunate fate for those who have been found guilty by the North Korean system, they go to these very difficult, very brutal labor camps, almost akin to the gulags during the Soviet period.

But the types of prisons that may be available to the two U.S. journalists would certainly be an improvement on those harsh labor conditions.

SANCHEZ: It would certainly not serve the interest of North Korea for these two women to either be hurt, sacrificed, or, even worse, killed, right?

PARK: That's correct.

And there seems to be right now an indication that what is an effort behind the North Koreans is to send a clear warning that the border should not be violated the way that the North Koreans report that they were violated by these two U.S. journalists.

SANCHEZ: Well, let's talk about the border, then. I'm a bit confused, as are most people, as to whether or not they actually crossed the border. The day it happened, they denied it. There was a cameraman who was close to the border at the time.

There is information that they were working on a story about human trafficking at this very river location. What can you share with us? What's your take on this?

PARK: Well, Rick, I have actually been to that area. It's very close to a small border town called Yanji (ph) on the Chinese side. And the border there is very porous. So, it's hard to denote, if this happened late at night, exactly what the different locations, the markers were.

But the North Koreans are adamant that it was an illegal border crossing.

SANCHEZ: Finally, I have to ask you about what I think many Americans try to understand about Pyongyang. Is -- is it possible that they have been taken for no other reasons than as to serve as pawns for the North Korean government, so that they can extract something from President Obama in subsequent negotiations?

PARK: That's one interpretation.

But another is that the North Korean border police captured them and through the investigation and subsequent steps realized who these two reporters were and that they in fact were U.S. citizens. But this theory that they were captured specifically as a part of this larger strategy, that still remains to be seen.

SANCHEZ: But wouldn't that fit -- would -- would that not fit what they have done in the past and what their needs are?

It seems like they're constantly trying to squeeze the U.S. government or the international community for anything they can possibly get. And here possibly they have been handed a gift to do just that. Is that a not -- did I incorrectly assess that in any way?

PARK: There's a lot of similarity, yes.

We have had instances where U.S. citizens have been detained. But what is very different right now is that North Korea had ample opportunity to enter into some kind of bargaining. But they have not. They have issued statements basically saying what they intend to do, but there is no request for anything in -- by way of these type of very tough bargaining sessions.

SANCHEZ: Well, you know your stuff.

John Park, my thanks to you, as an expert on this. And we will certainly be reaching out to you again as we as a nation now continue to follow this story. Thank you, sir.

PARK: My pleasure.

SANCHEZ: All right, take a look at this. Look at the size of this. This is certainly the biggest clue that we have seen so far as to what happened to Air France Flight 447. Sixteen bodies have now been recovered, and more chunks of metal and debris continue to come up. We're all over this. We will share it with you. We will tell you what the -- what the significance is.

Also, this -- a husband and wife in their 70s used shopping carts to allegedly spy on the U.S. government for Cuba for 30 years. And they were doing it for that guy. Do too many Americans, too many of us, romanticize, almost dismiss these people because of who they are accused of spying for? Think about that.

We will talk about it on the way back. Stay with us. We will be right back.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

CALLER: Hey, Rick. How you doing? This is Jason Thomas (ph) from Huntsville, Alabama.

I'm just calling about the two girls being detained in North Korea. Really, they are asking for it, because, come on, they come up with this stuff every time, and we keep on giving them a pass. I think this is just grandstanding. I really don't think they are going to serve 12 years. I think they should be out by the end of the month, even sooner than that.

But, seriously, they -- that government, like, really needs to be hammered.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Good to welcome you back. I'm Rick Sanchez here in the world headquarters of CNN.

A lot of tweets are already coming in on this last conversation we had moments ago. Let's go to our Twitter board, if we can. You know this is political chess. Patrick writes: "Why has Al Gore, Euna and Laura's boss" -- at Current TV -- "not made any public comment on this?"

And then somebody else slamming Gore. "My question is, where is Al Gore, and why is he so silent? He needs to get his butt to North Korea."

Speaking about Gore, go over to MySpace real quick, if you can, Robert, as we continue our newscast. Let me share something with you. "Global warming is baloney? Hmm. That's a pretty stupid statement. Who knows. That might be a publicity stunt. LOL."

Maybe not. By the way, we're going to be talking about that story in just a little bit because it has to do with five different Burger Kings who have had signs that say just that. And that's why we're drilling down on that today.

And I want you now to take a look at some pictures. These are photos we got in just today. And what they show is, at least so far, from what I have seen, the largest by far piece of debris from Air France Flight 447. We're also learning today the electronics on the plane were so out of sync that the pilot may not have known whether he was flying too fast or too slow or not even knowing how he was flying or in which direction.

The so-called black boxes have still not been found. They may be thousands of feet under water, as you have heard, where divers have less than 30 days now to find them, or that little pinging device that's inside there that lets it know where it is, the locator, will just automatically shut off. So, this is a deadline they're dealing with.

Meanwhile, in a sad and rather unsettling development, I should tell you, 16 bodies were found floating. It was about 700 miles off Brazil -- 228 people were on board this plane when it disappeared a week ago.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

CALLER: Hey, Rick, this is Adrien (ph).

Listen, these two journalists in North Korea is another mess that Bush got us into. All North Korea has to say is, at least we gave these two women a trial. It might have been behind closed doors. We may not have agreed to the trial, but at least they could say they gave them a trial.

We have people who are at Guantanamo Bay, been there for six, seven years. We haven't even given them a trial yet.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right. You guys on MySpace who say I spend way too much time on Twitter, here's another shout-out for you.

Let's go to -- let's go to MySpace, if we possibly can. And here's what people are saying. "Twelve years? Please. That crime was not that bad. That's crazy."

Thank you for your comment.

Now this -- when a small church demeans President Obama, it makes news, but it is, after all, a small church. When a bar hangs an offensive sign in their establishment demeaning a nationality or a race, it makes news, but it is, after all, a small bar.

What happens when a company as big as Burger King puts up a sign stating that quote, "Global warming is baloney" -- there it is -- that is what the fast food giant is now having to deal with, after as many as five restaurants in the Memphis area did just that.

We asked the Sierra Club for a response. It said that, "While an isolated and increasingly small minority continue to debate global warming, an overwhelming majority of scientists agree that it is happening."

Burger King says, the signs do not reflect its corporate opinion or view, and we believe that they have now asked them to take the signs down and, as far as we can tell, they may very well have been taken down. We will continue to check.

Joining us, though, is now Peter Shankman. He's a branding and social media consultant. He's joining us from New York.

Let me start with this. Just from a business standpoint, I want you to think about this. Why can't a local restaurant express what it believes to be the opinion of its clientele?

PETER SHANKMAN, BRANDING AND SOCIAL MEDIA CONSULTANT: Because, Rick, it's not a local restaurant. If it was Joe's Pub, as you said, that's fine. Joe's Pub, welcome to do whatever they want.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: But it is local to -- that particular -- if I live on Fifth Street in Memphis, and I go shopping at that Burger King, or I buy my burgers at that Burger King, to me, it's my local restaurant.

SHANKMAN: You're right. You're right. But it has a big -- a much bigger brand and it's a much bigger awareness. Joe's Pub wouldn't garner a spot on your show. And, if it did, it would be in passing. It certainly wouldn't have me in it.

Burger King has -- I guarantee you. I have never seen one of their franchise contracts, but I guarantee you, in their franchise contract, it says, essentially, don't do something like this that's that stupid.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Apparently -- no, you're -- you're right. We checked, and it does have that provision in the contract.

So, let's suppose the guy says, no, I feel strongly about this; I think global warming is crap; we're being lied to, and I'm going to keep the sign up.

What does Burger King do then?

SHANKMAN: Well, I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I would assume that they have do a lot of legal rights. And those -- those franchise contracts are not made to -- to fall down easily.

But the thing about is, is that you're not talking about -- you're not talking about Joe's Pub thinking about this. You're talking about Burger King, not store 5284, but Burger King. And they have a lot of lawyers that are going to say, hey, you're ruining our brand as a whole, as -- our reputation as a whole, because no one knows the difference between that Burger King and Burger King -- you don't say, I'm going to Burger King corporate or I'm going to Burger King 1272. You say, I'm going to Burger King.

And to mess with the brand on that kind of scale, and now it's national attention, is a dangerous thing to do. And Burger King, I guarantee you, has its eyes open very wide.

SANCHEZ: I was talking to someone in the business recently who said that oftentimes, when this happens to chains, what they will do is, issue another franchisee a block or half--a-block away to put up another Burger King or another McDonald's or whatever the case might be and just beat them at the punch and literally put them out of business.

Would they go as far as to do something like this? Would they protect their brand that much?

SHANKMAN: Burger King is -- is not one of those brands to be trifled with. I have no doubt that they would do something like that. It's -- it's similar to the pizza -- what, was it Domino's or Pizza Hut or whatever, a couple of months ago with the stupid kids, where they distanced themselves immediately and said, this is not us.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

SHANKMAN: They would do that in a lot of ways.

I asked my Twitter followers on -- at skydiver. I'm Skydiver at Twitter. I have about 42,000 of them. And I said, if you go into a store and they offend you, do you hurt the store or -- do you hate the store or the brand? And, overwhelmingly, a lot of them said it affects the brand and that they would not go back.

SANCHEZ: How important is that brand for somebody like Burger King or any of these companies that we look at? I mean, do they need to protect themselves against something like this, because it's just really a political opinion?

In fact, let me ask you this while I'm thinking about it. Something else just popped into my head. Do you think we will start to see companies make -- take social or political positions, even if they are controversy -- controversial?

SHANKMAN: I think they will stay away from controversy, per se.

But, hey, McDonald's and the main -- the main -- the main names out there, McDonald's, Burger King, they have been recycling and calling themselves green for years.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

SHANKMAN: You know, Starbucks, this -- this cup is made from 80 percent recycled. We're helping the environment. McDonald's took the whole thing with getting kids healthy. Every -- every soda you have, which has 12,000 grams of sugar, still has a little kid doing some exercises on the -- on the soda cup. So, they are aware of that.

SANCHEZ: So -- so -- so, a conservative -- so, a conservative guy or gal who's watching that and says, you know what, I don't agree with this whole green thing, I think we're paying too much attention to it, the president's spending too much money trying to fix our cars and our economy using this green philosophy, why are they pushing that down my throat?

SHANKMAN: The difference -- the difference is, is that the stuff they're trying to do, you know, getting kids thinner, no one's going to question that that helps.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

SHANKMAN: You know, so it really comes to what is good and what is controversial.

And, if it's controversial, companies tend to step as far back as humanly possible.

SANCHEZ: Peter Shankman, you're good. I really enjoyed the conversation.

SHANKMAN: Thanks, Rick. My pleasure.

SANCHEZ: Let's get you back. All right.

SANCHEZ: Roger Federer won the tennis French Open, right? Take a look at these pictures. Something really bizarre happened as he was winning. Have you seen this latest video classic? You will in just a little bit.

All right. Sarah Palin has given what many are calling a stellar speech, except much of it wasn't really her speech. It was Newt Gingrich's speech. And now she's having to explain.

Also, who is telling president and Mrs. Obama to stop sightseeing again? That date night thing? That's ahead in our political segment.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP) CALLER: Hey, Rick, this is Bob (ph) from North Dakota.

And I think that it is preposterous, outrageous and narcissistic of North Korea to hold two of our Americans.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Yes, we got a comment right away about that conversation we had moments ago. Let's check this out.

This is on MySpace as well. "You know, I work in a Burger King in Chicago. This is hilarious. It's most likely a publicity stunt," referring to the sign in Memphis stores that seem -- or restaurants -- that seem to indicate -- or that said that global warming was baloney.

And he finishes it off by saying, "But, yes, I know that corporate wouldn't let that run for long."

Apparently, they aren't.

Roger Federer wins the French Open. You may have heard that headline. But did you catch this moment? Take the video. Go ahead, Dan. This is a man running up to Federer. He's dressed like a loon and waving a flag. And he tries to put a red hat on his head. It's weird.

The crowd boos. Federer gets pushed, pushes the guy away, and then security comes in. Watch this. Bang. Down goes strange man. The intruder, allegedly, as police tried to figure out, was a Federer fan, and he was eventually dragged off the court.

By the way, Federer is fine.

If the tennis world was momentarily shocked by that act, imagine how the diplomatic community is reacting to this. A married couple in the United States are now accused of spying for the Cuban government for 30 years.

That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right, welcome back.

Let's get right into this one. This next one reads like a spy novel. And it's obviously kind of close to my heart, complete with secrets, shortwave radios, information passed by swapping grocery carts, messages inked on water-soluble paper, basically, all the little spy tricks and shadowy gimmicks that we have seen and read about in the movies, novels.

But this one involves an American couple accused of handing over secrets to Cuba for 30 years, Walter Kendall Myers, who worked at the State Department, and his wife, Gwendolyn. My guest knows a thing or two about their case and others like it. Chris Simmons is considered one of the country's foremost authorities on Cuban intelligence and counterintelligence. And he's good enough to join us.

Chris, the Myers are indicted for three decades of allegedly spying for Cuba. First of all, how do you get away with something like this for three decades, 30 years?

CHRIS SIMMONS, FORMER DEFENSE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE OFFICER: Well, in the case of Cuba, Cuban intelligence was ranked as probably about the sixth best service in the world. And we as a nation have underestimated them for 50 years. And, so, those are the two key factors that play in together.

SANCHEZ: Well, let me tell you -- let me tell you why I think to a certain extent we underestimate them. I think to a certain extent, we as a nation romanticize Fidel Castro. We romanticize the Cuban Revolution.

We have many Americans wearing Che Guevara shirts and sporting them somewhat famously and proudly on their -- on their bodies, to the extent that that sometimes permeates our political discussion and allows us to allow take in -- to allow something like this to happen. You agree?

SIMMONS: OH, absolutely.

And Havana plays to that perception. They have long understood that it's easier to reinforce a perception than create a new one. And so they work the idea that they're the victim, that they're the underdog, and they manipulate people into doing -- as you indicated, playing to the revolution.

SANCHEZ: But let's -- there are those who will say, you know what, in the scheme of things, Cuba's not a powerful or scary country anymore. This isn't the Cuban Missile Crisis anymore. This has really turned itself into a Third World country that's very weak. How much damage can they do us by stealing our information?

And to those who say that, you would say what?

SIMMONS: I would say the idea that Cuba's not a threat is pure propaganda. And it emanates actually from Havana.

The long and short of it is, Cuba is an intelligence trafficker. It steals U.S. secrets and it sells or barters them on the open market to anyone that has something to trade, to offer.

SANCHEZ: That's -- that's fascinating, because what you just said is, it's not about Cuba getting our secrets. It's about North Korea. It's about Iran. It's about any one of our enemies and sometimes even our friends getting our secrets.

SIMMONS: Oh, exactly. Exactly. And the Myers are a perfect example, because Kendall Myers had limited access to Cuban information, could not change Cuba policy -- U.S. policy towards Cuba. He worked European issues. And, so, in terms of what could he do for Cuba, he -- he provided a commodity that they needed and that was of high value to a lot of their supporters.

SANCHEZ: You know, Ana Montes's case and the supposed spider (ph) cases and all the others that we have read about in the past, how are they able to do this, though, without being detected?

I'm -- I'm not quite sure. Doesn't someone have to be asleep at the switch, or is it that easy to lie to us and fool us this way?

SIMMONS: It's not that it's easy. It's, right now, we believe that Cuba has about 250 officers and agents working throughout the United States.

SANCHEZ: Today, right now?

SIMMONS: Right now.

SANCHEZ: So if there's 250 and we just busted two of them, there's another 248 out there right now who are spying on the United States? Is that what you're saying?

SIMMONS: That's absolutely what I'm saying. So what --

SANCHEZ: Wait. Hold on. Hold on. You piqued my curiosity. Where and how? Inside the government, inside the media? Where are these people, and what are they doing?

SIMMONS: We believe most of Cuba's agents and officers are in Florida, because from the regime's perspective, Cuban Americans are the greatest threat.

The rest of their account is throughout the United States. I know from one defector who worked in U.S. targets that he believes there are about six to nine more agents just like Anna Montez.

SANCHEZ: What should the -- what advice -- final question -- what advice would you give to the Obama administration for dealing with this, given that they have been showing signs that they will make overtures to normalize relations with the Cuban government? What would be your advice to them?

SIMMONS: It still goes back to Cuba is an intelligence trafficker. U.S. secrets are one of the biggest commodities leaving Cuba today and it's been that way for almost 30 years.

And so in dealing with this regime, they need to understand that Cuba is stealing our information and giving it to our enemies with the expectation that some Americans are going to get killed in the process.

SANCHEZ: Should we normalize relations so we wouldn't have to worry about them being our enemies and wanting to steal our secrets? SIMMONS: The Castro brothers will be our enemy as long as they're alive.

SANCHEZ: My thanks to you. Interesting interview, interesting perspective on, certainly, something that I have been studying most of my life as well. We will get you back.

SIMMONS: Thank you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CINDY SHEEHAN: They must be held accountable!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: This is Cindy Sheehan. She lost her son in Iraq and she is not letting George W. Bush forget about it. But in Dallas, the former president's neighbors want nothing to do with her or her protests.

This is a conflict that's developing over the next hour. We are on it, and we will bring it to you.

Also, we will tell you what she's saying, and now, what they're saying as well, the neighbors in Dallas, specifically, about Cindy Sheehan.

Stay with us. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We welcome you back to the world headquarters of CNN. I'm Rick Sanchez.

Always good to take advice from some of you who watch this newscast and tell us what you like or what you don't like or what you think we should cover more.

Like this. This is "Missouri Girl" watching us, obviously enough, from Missou (ph). She says "Can you go more in depth about Cuban spies at another time? I studied Cuba, too, and read a lot on it. Fascinating." We think so, too.

All right, is the stimulus plan fixing the nation's economy? An Obama cabinet member joins me next to talk about just that.

But before we do that, I want to talk about a follow-up now. I showed you recently Nancy Reagan's visit to the White House. She was there to make President Reagan's birthday a national commemorative event in 2011.

She also attended the unveiling of a statute of her late husband. You see it in the top box, right? There's another piece of video I want you to see now. Five years after his death, Nancy Reagan is seen here placing flowers at her husband's resting place. This photo was taken Friday in Simi Valley, California. This is from the Ronald Reagan presidential library. We thought you would want to see it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: In diplomacy, every time words are uttered, it's an update on a story. And I think there's a possibility we might be getting an update on the story now about Laura Ling and Euna Lee being sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in North Korea.

What you're looking at here is a briefing room in the State Department. We at CNN have been told that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is going to be coming out any moment now and making some statements. It's expected that she will likely make comments on the situation with Laura Ling and Euna Lee.

Again, their situation grew somewhat more perilous overnight when we learned that, in fact, they had been sentenced to 12 years of hard labor, this going back to the June 17 incident when they are alleged to have crossed the river trying to get into North Korea, at least so says the North Korean government in Pyongyang. And it's for that reason that they say they are going to be holding them there.

We are certainly going to be keeping an eye on this story. We will continue to follow it.

Let's see -- stay with us real quick. Let's see if Hillary Clinton will in fact be coming out. Sometimes you can tell from the demeanor of some of the reporters, which it's kind of hard to tell at this point.

Let's do this. Let's sneak a break in. Maybe when we come back, we will either do one of two things. We will be either going to Hillary Clinton to bring you the very latest on that, or we will be taking you to the White House.

We will be speaking to one of the President Obama's cabinet members, the secretary of agriculture, who will break down whether or not the stimulus plan is working or not and whether the economy is getting fixed or not, and give us some sense of timetable, which is I know what many of you want.

So we'll do either of those two things when we come back, one, promised as guaranteed. Stay there. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: First a programming note for you. Let me bring you this. Give me that shot, Dan, if you can, over at State Department, because we will be taking you there if we see Secretary of State Hillary Clinton walk out.

And then we are also planning to take you to the White House in just a little bit. And the reason we're doing this is we want to give you a report card from White House officials, from members of the president's cabinet, about whether or not the stimulus package is working or not, the one the president was referring to earlier in the day.

So keep all this in mind. We will be going to that in just a little bit. Stand by.

Meanwhile, let's talk about this -- having your son die in a war that you now believe was unnecessary is a justification for protesting your government, right?

But is it justification of a continued protest of a former president? Here's why I'm saying this. Cindy Sheehan believes that it is. There she is. She's protested consistently, as you know, during the Bush years, even camping out at his ranch several times.

But within the hour, Cindy Sheehan is going to be protesting the former president again. This time, she's going to do it near his home in Dallas, his new digs.

And his neighbors are not at all happy about this. Democratic strategist Maria Cardona and Republican strategist Rich Galen are good enough to join us now for their take on this.

Maria, should she let it go?

MARIA CARDONA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: You know, that's a very tough thing to say to somebody who lost her son in Iraq, who is somebody, unfortunately, whose experience is not alone. A lot of mothers and fathers have lost their children in Iraq.

And it is very tough for her to let this go. To her, President Bush will always be the reason that her son died. Now, whether she's correct or not, this is something that has become very personal.

I don't think that it's a policy issue for her now. I don't think that it is anything else other than a very personal issue. She blames President Bush for, you know, the fact that her son is gone and nothing that happens is going to bring him back.

I don't know, you know, I don't know if she should continue doing that. Bu who are we to say yes or no? But it's just very sad.

RICH GALEN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I can say yes or no. The answer's no.

SANCHEZ: Why? Why no? Why no?

GALEN: Well, enough, already. She did the camp out when the president went to Crawford. That ran out of gas. People quit covering her. So she packed up and ran home. She ran against Nancy Pelosi in the Democratic primary for U.S. congress. She was obviously embarrassed doing that.

SANCHEZ: She was just as hard on some of the Democrats as she was on the Republicans. GALEN: I'm just saying at some point, the press corps has to say, you know what, this is just a woman looking for a new way to make news on an unbelievably sad but old story, enough.

SANCHEZ: What about the fact that some of the neighbors are saying she should go back to wherever she came from? Some of them said some things that were maybe not hostile, but very direct.

(CROSSTALK)

GALEN: But if she was bringing disorder to my neighborhood, I would say get out, go somewhere else. Don't come around here.

SANCHEZ: Isn't that why people in that neighborhood originally had said in private, for the most part, that they didn't want the president to move in there?

GALEN: I'm from Dallas, and I don't remember anybody saying that at all.

SANCHEZ: Come on -- Maria?

CARDONA: As long as she's not breaking any laws, -- this is what's so fabulous about this country. She has the right to speak out. And, unfortunately, she feels this is something that she needs to continue to speak out on. Unfortunately, I think for Republicans, it's going to continue to remind Americans the fact that this war was so ill-conceived.

GALEN: Nobody's changing a vote because of Cindy Sheehan.

SANCHEZ: I understand that. Still, though, when she shows up and the camera shows up and the people start protesting back, you got a controversy and a conflict. And that makes for a news story.

Let's move on to another outspoken woman, Governor Sarah Palin. Did she rip off a Newt Gingrich speech when she introduced Ronald Reagan's son last week -- Wednesday, I believe, to be exact -- in Anchorage?

Listen, I will read you her line here, OK, specifically. And here it is -- quote, "We have to remember first that Ronald Reagan never won any arguments in Washington. He won the arguments by resonating with the American people." Now, that's what Sarah Palin says, right?

Let me see if I can find Newt Gingrich's words now. Ready? Here's what Newt Gingrich and Shirly -- and Craig Shirley had written four years earlier -- "Reagan never won an argument in Washington. Reagan won his arguments in the country with the American people." Sounds pretty close.

GALEN: Yes, sounds almost like something Joe Biden would have done, doesn't.

SANCHEZ: Biden did. Biden did. Touche, sir. Maria, look, is this Palin pile-on, or a legitimate beef?

CARDONA: I think it is -- that specific one I think is Palin pile-on. You know, there are a lot of reasons to criticize her or other leaders in the Republican Party, mainly because they can't get their act together.

I think more of a news story is the fact that Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin can't figure out who was invited to speak where at this upcoming dinner, you know.

Here's my idea --

SANCHEZ: Well, she doesn't want to, what was the word they're using -- Show him up. So she's not going to be there when he speaks.

CARDONA: Right. But here's an idea -- Gingrich-Palin, 2012. Now, that's a dream team.

GALEN: Newt -- I used to be Newt's press secretary so let me defend my old boss.

SANCHEZ: Your guy.

GALEN: Yes. He jumped into this dinner deal after the Palin people so badly screwed it up that both committees needed somebody to headline the dinner. He stepped in. He allowed his name to be used. He's been very helpful.

And they will raise about $14 million, which in this day and age, as Maria knows, is a significant amount of money in a hard money event.

SANCHEZ: Topic three, the Obamas go on another date, supposedly, or at least that's what some may be calling it. And critics, well, they criticize.

The Obamas are getting heat or have gotten heat from conservative radio and conservative TV last week for going to a Broadway play. Well, guess what? They did it again this past weekend, this time in Paris at the end of the president's trip to Egypt, Germany, and France.

You can't see the Obamas in this video, but this does give you an idea of all the security that had to follow them around, which is what some people often get mad about.

Now, to the point, and it's Senator Chuck Grassley's point. He sent out a tweet, he's tweetering, twittering, yes, like me. It says, "President Obama, while you were sight-seeing in Paris, you said it's time to deliver on health care.

When you are a hammer, you think everything is nail. I'm no nail."

So, look -- and this wasn't the only one. He sent out two tweets, and in both of them he seemed to be suggesting they shouldn't be sightseeing.

Rich, is this a winner for the Republicans or something they should just stay away from?

GALEN: No, I think it's actually one of those things that over time -- we don't know the answer to how this is going to play out.

But I think it does play into the Republicans view of the Obamas, that there's an arrogance level that is growing. If they keep doing this, I think they raise a -- they're giving the Republicans an issue which under normal circumstances Republicans wouldn't have.

I mean, look, it's tough enough to be president or first lady. If you want to go to dinner, god bless you, go. But in this time and this day and age, taking the family on a sightseeing trip to Paris is a little tough to take.

CARDONA: First of all, Rick --

SANCHEZ: I was thinking -- oh, we have Hillary Clinton coming up. Hey, guys, I want to jump in real quick, because I think the Secretary of State's coming out now and she's making some comments. We're going to see if she says something about the situation in North Korea. Let's take it, guys.

HILLARY CLINTON, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: ... and I have already met in Jakarta. We've talked in the phone on important matters.

And it's a very wonderful part of, you know, my position to be able to have him here to continue the productive conversation --

SANCHEZ: Let me get back into this real quick, if we can.

Angie, I think this is an introduction -- and she's introducing -- who's she introducing? The foreign minister of Indonesia, OK. So, she's going to be making some comments with the foreign minister of Indonesia, something we would not normally break in for you except today there's news out of North Korea.

So, what Angie, my executive producer is going to do, is tell me in my ear as soon as the conversation starts shifting toward North Korea, and then we'll take that immediately.

Maria, before we go, one quick comment. I gave Rich a chance to talk about that situation about the president's travel. I bet you're going to say something about all of Bush's travel days at his ranch, aren't you?

CARDONA: Well, not only that, I think that when you compare the two, you know, Bush blows him out of the water completely.

But I'll say two other things. First of all, all of the family travel, all of that is going -- the Obamas are going to pay that back. So, taxpayers are not paying for that.

Secondly, I don't think the American people will begrudge this president, who has worked tirelessly and has really focused on all of these problems head on that he inherited from this administration, they're not going to begrudge him taking his wife out to dinner.

(CROSSTALK)

GALEN: I think I see a difference going to Waco, Texas and going to Paris, France. I think most people would admit that there is some difference.

SANCHEZ: But, rich, it all depends on how much time you spend in each place and the record shows --

GALEN: He didn't go to Paris just to go on vacation, and you know that, Rich.

SANCHEZ: Listen, it's a good argument, and I love you both. And keep coming back, because it's always good to have these discussions.

Rich, we'll see you later.

GALEN: Nice to be with both of you.

CARDONA: Thanks, Rick.

SANCHEZ: Maria, same to you.

CARDONA: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: By the way, comment coming in right now on this conversation.

"I don't think there's anything wrong with Cindy protesting still. We are still living with the repercussions of Bush's policies, and I'm speaking of someone who will be sending her own loved one there this August."

All right, here's what we want to talk about now-- the situation that's going on with the U.S. economy. And I know many of you have been wondering what's going on.

We saw fewer U.S. job losses than we had expected just last month. That was for May. This is a good sign.

However, let's put this in perspective. The unemployment rate is still alarmingly high. So, we're asking, is the president's economic stimulus plan actually working?

Joining us now from the White House lawn is a member of the Obama cabinet, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. Governor Vilsack, good to see you, sir.

TOM VILSACK, U.S. AGRICULTURE SECRETARY: It's nice to be with you, Rick.

SANCHEZ: Is the administration taking credit for last week's numbers, you know, that if you look at the actual, at the bar graph that we were looking at, it looks good -- 350,000, not good. But compared to 800,000, 900,000 job losses back in January, not bad, right?

VILSACK: I think, Rick, it's pretty clear that if we did not have the Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we would have seen much larger numbers both last month and the previous several months.

We're headed in the right direction, but as the president said, we've got a lot of work to do. We're looking for a fourfold increase in the number of jobs being created in the next 100 days as a result of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and we'd like to see an acceleration of that over time.

SANCHEZ: But the Recovery and Reinvestment Act involves spending the people's money, and that's what Republicans are going to be hitting with you, and they're going to continue to do so as we look at this policy.

How do you look at the American people and say to them, we have to spend your money to get money back in your pocket and create jobs for you? How do you -- how do you explain that?

VILSACK: I think, Rick, we basically point to the fact that we're doing the work that Americans want done -- 1,500 new highway projects in the next 100 days, 200 water treatment operations around rural America in the next 100 days, 125,000 young people being given jobs through the Department of Labor in the next 100 days, 135,000 education jobs, teachers and staff, being saved or retained or added because of the Recovery and Reinvestment act in the next 100 days.

All of that are tangible results of this recovery and reinvestment investment. We're not only creating jobs today, not only stemming the job losses, but we're also building the foundation for a much stronger long-term economy in this country, an economy based on clean jobs and clean energy.

SANCHEZ: Governor, Have we hit bottom yet on any of these three areas -- unemployment, the market, or housing? Have we hit bottom?

VILSACK: Well, I think we've seen an improvement in the market, an upswing in the market. I think we've seen the stabilization of housing. Credit has become a little bit more available.

We obviously have a ways to go. But the president has been very clear, we expected to see unemployment rise, and we expect to see those numbers begin to dip in the latter part of this year, the first part of next year.

The reality is that's why the Recovery and Reinvestment Act has extended unemployment benefits and food assistance and tax relief for American families to help get through in this difficult time.

SANCHEZ: All right, governor, thanks so much. We thank you, sir, for former governor, secretary -- but every governor I've always known keeps the governor moniker, right?

(LAUGHTER)

VILSACK: It's whatever you're comfortable with.

SANCHEZ: All right, thank you, sir. We appreciate it.

VILSACK: You bet.

SANCHEZ: We'll be catching up with you in a little bit.

We'll be back in just a moment, more news on the way.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: What happens when -- oh, by the way, I was told moments ago that I needed to let you know what was going on.

We're monitoring this situation that you're looking at there. That's from the State Department. That's not Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, obviously enough. That is her Indonesian counterpart.

And if she makes any comments on what's going on with North Korea, we will bring that to you right away.

Now this story -- what happens when hair bands collide with the great white way? You get "Rock of Ages," the musical hit nominated at last night's Tony awards.

But check out what you get when a hair brand front man literally collides with a piece of the Broadway stage. Boom! Did you see that? Watch it again. Watch, watch, watch. Right there. Bang. The whole thing comes down on his head.

That's Bret Michaels from the group Poison, one of my favorite groups. He misses his mark and the end of his performance. And, d'oh!

A Tony spokesperson said that Mr. Michaels suffered no serious injuries. No word, though, on damage to his hair, or, for that matter, his pride. Poison, love them.

Wolf Blitzer is a big fan, too, and he's standing by in "The Situation Room" -- Wolf?