Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Health Care Battle; Cambridge Police Defend Fellow Officer; Petraeus Assessing Iraq Transition; Alabama Town in Peril; Homeland Security Long Reach
Aired July 24, 2009 - 12:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Okay. Some breaking news now on health care reform legislation, particularly in the House. Let's get to Capitol Hill right now. Brianna Keilar is there, and, Brianna, what are you hearing?
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Tony, as you know, the real hang-up in the House of Representatives with the Democrats' health care proposal there is that it's been hung up in this key committee, the Energy and Commerce Committee. And what we've learned is that the chairman of that committee is saying they may bypass the entire committee process and take the bill straight to the floor of the house, if they cannot come to an agreement.
Not with Republicans, but with some of their own Democrats. Because one of the things that's really been slowing down the process here is there's a lot of infighting going between different Democratic factions. In particular, this group called the blue dog Democrats, these fiscally conservative Democrats who have raised concerns about the costs of health care reform and how to pay for it.
In this Energy and Commerce Committee, they have actually stalled the process by saying, we are not happy that our concerns have not been included in this reform plan, and so we're not allowing this to move beyond the committee process unless you take our concerns into account. Well, it now sounds like the chairman here saying, hey, we may just scoot by this committee process altogether if we can't come to an agreement with these blue dog Democrats.
Henry Waxman actually saying, quote, "We cannot let them embolden Republicans." So, you see here, the Democrats, a key Democrat, really pointing the finger at some other Democrats and the blame for this stall of the health care reform plan in the House.
HARRIS: Well, this is an interesting development, because as we know, Henry Waxman chairs the committee you're referring to, Oversight and Government. But here's the interesting thing, there are at least two other committees -- and correct me if I'm wrong here -- in the house working on this. And is the idea to bypass the work that Waxman's committee is stuck on and then get to the work of melding these two -- of the work on the legislation from these two other committees?
KEILAR: Well, actually, what you have is, yes, Ways and Means Committee and Education and Labor, and then Energy and Commerce. It's very complicated, but all of them have to weigh in. HARRIS: Yes. No, but you're doing a good job of explaining this.
KEILAR: Well, these other committees, they have been able to move through this plan through the committee. So, at this point it would just be -- I guess it would be to meld those -- but actually, you know, really, what we should point out, Tony, is that each of these committees kind of has a different jurisdiction, they deal with different parts of it.
HARRIS: Right.
KEILAR: So it may not be that much melding that has to go on, but certainly...
HARRIS: Got you.
KEILAR: But yes, so that would be -- the step would be just to bypass this and go to the floor with it.
HARRIS: But the other point of this is, what, there are 51, 52 Blue Dogs?
KEILAR: Fifty-two.
HARRIS: Yes. And I'm trying to do the math in my head. You would still need those Democrats on board, right?
KEILAR: Yes, you would. But here's the key -- it's much easier as a Blue Dog Democrat to stall at this process, at the committee process, than to get in the way of a full vote before the House floor, because then you're really standing in the way. You're not just standing in the way of an incremental step along the process.
HARRIS: That's the important bit.
KEILAR: So, that's why moving to the floor would put the pressure on these Blue Dog Democrats to get on board.
HARRIS: That's the important bit.
KEILAR: Yes.
HARRIS: All right. On Capitol Hill, Brianna Keilar for us.
Brianna, thank you.
Health care reform deadlines and delays. A Senate vote by the August recess not going to happen. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says it is more important to do it right than to do it quickly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: I think it's better to have a product that is one that's based on quality and thoughtfulness, rather than trying to jam something through. (END VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: Senator Reid and Senator Max Baucus meeting with President Obama today.
White House Correspondent Suzanne Malveaux joins us live.
Suzanne, we wish you were in the room for that meeting, whether there's any way to know what's happening inside right now.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Boy, if I could be a fly on the wall.
HARRIS: Yes.
MALVEAUX: But we do have a sense of what's happening inside the Oval Office at the moment, because I did have an opportunity to talk to the press secretary, Robert Gibbs, earlier this morning. And I asked him, is the president going to press a new deadline, essentially, because of this August recess deadline not quite working out for the administration and the president?
He said, no, that he's going to listen to these two very powerful figures and figure out, what is the timing here? What are they looking at? What's realistic? What can they negotiate? What can they give up? What does he need to say, perhaps, a role that he needs to play in this whole process?
That that's what the meeting that's taking place in the Oval Office is all about. Gibbs said that he did not expect there would be a signing ceremony per se before the August recess, but there's certainly going to be a lot of work, Tony, that he says the president's going to be out a lot in the weeks and the months to come regarding this. And the president is going to be a bit more flexible on this.
He is pushing them obviously behind the scenes, but he's talking about by the end of the year here. So, there's obviously some wiggle room here.
His chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is very much doing some heavy lifting as well. He met with that group that you were talking about just moments ago, the Blue Dog Democrats, and one person asked him how the meeting went, saying, "How much of it was cracking heads or begging for support?" And he said, well, it was somewhere in between, in the middle here.
So, what you're seeing is, privately, the president very much engaged, very much involved with lawmakers who at the forefront of this. And then publicly, also, Tony, we are going to see the president once again out on the road, trying to sell this directly to the American people, going to Raleigh, Roanoke, some other places in the days and the weeks to come -- Tony.
HARRIS: And Suzanne, really, is there anything the president is going to do differently moving forward? MALVEAUX: Well, one of the things that he is going to do -- and we have seen it just over the last 48 hours -- is he's trying to lay this out in very plain, simple language to make the case that this is something that applies to everybody. He's not just going to be emphasizing the 46 million or so who are uninsured and the importance of bringing them along, but he's also trying to give the message that, if you do have insurance, that you're not necessarily going to be charged more for your health care costs.
A lot of these Blue Dog Democrats are saying, look, we keep hearing about taxes and increases, these kind of things. People who have insurance already who are very concerned about this plan, he's going to try to address their concerns as well -- Tony.
HARRIS: OK.
Our White House Correspondent Suzanne Malveaux for us.
Suzanne, appreciate it. Thank you.
It is the professor versus the policeman. The Massachusetts sergeant at the center of a debate over the arrest of a Harvard professor at a news conference getting under way, we understand, any minute now. Wow, we're really close.
OK. Police unions in Cambridge, Massachusetts, are backing Officer James Crowley. Crowley told local affiliate, WHDH, reporter Kim Khazei, that Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. was the aggressor in the confrontation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SGT. JAMES CROWLEY, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS, POLICE: I was continuously telling him to calm down during this whole exchange because I didn't really want this either. And I didn't -- although I didn't know at the time who Professor Gates was, knowing he was an affiliate of Harvard, I really didn't want to have to take such a drastic action because I knew that it was going to bring a certain amount of attention, unwanted attention, on me. Nonetheless, that's how far Professor Gates pushed it and provoked, and just wouldn't stop.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: OK. Let's get you life to the news conference under way right now in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
ALAN MCDONALD, COUNSEL, CAMBRIDGE POLICE: ... of which both Cambridge unions are members.
Earlier this week, the Superior Officers Association, after conducting its own review, issued a press release expressing its full and unqualified support for the actions of Sergeant Crowley in connection with his encounter with Professor Gates on July 16, 2009. Yesterday, we were pleased to learn that after its own intensive investigation, the Cambridge Police Department also expressed its support for Sergeant Crowley, clearing him of any wrongdoing and declaring him -- his actions consistent with local and national standards of police practice.
The leadership groups of both associations are here today, with their leadership officers, to offer visual support for Sergeant Crowley, and they carry with them the unequivocal and enthusiastic support of the rank-and-file police officers they represent in Cambridge and surrounding communities. In addition, there are many of the members of the Cambridge Multi-Cultural Police Association present today to support Sergeant Crowley.
And I am authorized in his absence to express the support of that organization's president, Anthony Santiago (ph), who is here -- not here only because of babysitting issues. He wanted me to make sure that I conveyed his wishes, his statement of support for Sergeant Crowley, and on behalf of himself and his membership.
On behalf of the unions and their members, let me assure everyone that the officers of the Cambridge Police Department are committed to the professional and nondiscriminatory enforcement of the law. They respect and embrace the diversity within their own community, and, indeed, within their own ranks. They make hundreds of decisions each week and thousands of decisions each year in the preservation of the peace. Race does not play a role of any kind in that decision-making and played no role in the decision-making in this case.
On my advice and in the interests of his family, Sergeant Crowley is here today, but will not be making any statement and will not be answering any questions. His comments about the event have been recorded in interviews conducted by WEEI Radio and Channel 7 News, and are available for view in those facilities. If you're interested, you can see every word that he has spoken.
For purposes of today, we are here simply to support him, to express to all of you that all of us collectively and individually believe that he acted appropriately, as any police officer would, in conducting a response to a break-in-progress call and processing that call, and in disposing of the case.
At this time, I'll turn to other leadership members on the panel to make comments of their own.
Thank you.
SGT. DENNIS O'CONNOR, PRESIDENT, CAMBRIDGE POLICE SUPERIOR OFFICERS ASSOCIATION: Good afternoon.
My name's Sergeant Dennis O'Connor. I'm the president of the Cambridge Police Superior Officers Association.
I'd like to start first by thanking the -- our brother -- our brother and sister fellow officers who have sent us thousands and thousands of e-mails of support. And I especially want to thank the citizens of Cambridge who have come forward to support us. I'm going to read a prepared statement.
I would like to comment briefly in reply to the statements made by Governor Patrick and President Obama regarding this case. It is noteworthy that both qualified their statements by saying they did not have all the facts.
Usually, when one hears those words, one would expect the next words will be, "So I cannot comment." Instead, both officials, both admitted friends of Professor Gates, proceeded to insult the handling of this case by the Cambridge Police Department.
President Obama said that the actions of the CPD were stupid and linked the event to a history of racial profiling in America. The facts of this case suggest that the president used the right adjective, but directed it to the wrong party. His remarks were obviously misdirected, but made worse yet by a suggestion that somehow this case should remind us of a history of racial abuse by law enforcement.
Whatever may be the history, the supervisors and the patrol officers of the Cambridge Police Department deeply resent the implication and reject any suggestion that in this case, or any other case, they have allowed a person's race to direct their activities. However, we hope that they will reflect upon their past comments and apologize to the men and women of the Cambridge Police Department.
Thank you.
MCDONALD: Steve Killian, president of the Cambridge Police Patrol Officers Association.
Good afternoon, folks. Thank you all for coming.
STEVE KILLIAN, CAMBRIDGE POLICE PATROL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION: As president of the Cambridge Police Patrol Officers Association, I am here to put full support behind Sergeant Crowley's actions. I've known Sergeant Crowley for 11 years, his career here. He's done a marvelous job. And for this to happen to him was wrong.
Cambridge police are not stupid. I am proud to represent the officers of the Cambridge Police Department. It is a great department. I think everybody that knows us knows that.
I'm a third-generation Cambridge police officer in my family, and I'm very proud to be a police officer. And I think if you ask any of the officers in Cambridge, they'll tell you they're proud to be here.
As far as the president's comments, the governor's comments, and comments that I did not hear that our mayor made, I think when the time is right, they should make an apology to us. I think the president should make an apology to all law enforcement personnel throughout the entire country that took offense to this.
With that, thank you very much. And let's get by this. Harold MacGilvray, president of the Medford Police Patrol Officers Association, and also president of the Massachusetts Municipal Police Coalition.
Thank you, and good afternoon.
HAROLD MACGILVRAY, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL POLICE COALITION: I'm here representing the 22 member unions of the Massachusetts Municipal Police Coalition. I'm speaking in one unified voice on behalf of the union presidents and their memberships.
We completely support Sergeant Crowley and the fine men and women of the Cambridge Police Department. We want the viewers to know that our Web site is being inundated with e-mails from law enforcement officers and ordinary citizens from across the United States expressing their support for Sergeant Crowley and the Cambridge Police Department, and we'd like to thank everybody for that support.
And on behalf of the entire membership of the MMPC, we'd just like to say that we have Sergeant Crowley and his family in our thoughts.
Thank you.
MCDONALD: We'll open the floor for questions.
Sir? Right here. Right here.
QUESTION: OK. Thank you, sir. (OFF-MIKE)
MCDONALD: I think, you know, that was a decision that was made without our input. We think in retrospect, given the publicity that has transpired, it would have been better to let the matter go forward to a trial of fact so that the truth could have been disclosed by means other than debates in the media that we've expressed or that we've seen over the last few days.
We have no control over that. It's done. And I think that's the best way I can answer your question.
John (ph)?
QUESTION: Do you have a representative of (OFF-MIKE)?
MCDONALD: There are a number of members here...
QUESTION: Can someone speak now?
MCDONALD: No one is going to speak now.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) come up with a vote of support as an organization, an association, that have they thrown their support behind Sergeant Crowley, or do you simply have individuals in the association here today to show their individual but not official support? MCDONALD: I think the answer to your question is that there's both. There are individuals here showing their support. I've also been authorized by the president of the organization to express support on behalf of the organization.
QUESTION: Have any of you spoken (OFF-MIKE) to the governor at all besides through the news media? Have you reached out to them?
MCDONALD: We haven't reached out to them. That's something that we will be talking about in the coming weeks. But right now, our main concern is to make sure that everyone understands our position with respect to Sergeant Crowley and our dislike of what's happening to him.
QUESTION: Have you had a chance to talk to them?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have not. We have not.
QUESTION: You said you want an apology from the president and from the governor. Would you also like an apology from Professor Gates? And if not, why not?
He wants an apology from the sergeant here, and the sergeant made has clear that he's not going to apologize. Do you think it would be appropriate to put this thing to rest, in your words, to have the professor apologize for his actions?
MCDONALD: Well, let me make it clear, we're not demanding an apology from anyone. Our view is that we think if Governor Patrick and the president review all of the facts -- which they did not have before them when they made their off-the-hip remarks -- that they would have commented differently.
We're hopeful that upon reflection, they will realize that their statements were misguided and will take appropriate action in the form of an apology. If Professor Gates chose to do that, I think that would be an excellent outcome, but we're making no such request, and we'll leave that decision to him.
OK. Right here.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
MCDONALD: Well, that's hard to say. We haven't heard the tapes. Sometimes they're very effective in capturing what happens, sometimes they're not.
I believe they will be released when the city solicitor conducts his review. And as you know, if you listened to the police commissioner's press conference yesterday, there will be a panel authorized to review this matter, and I presume they will have access to those tapes.
QUESTION: A spokesperson for the police department said today that is not going to be released -- it's not going to be released until the panel has finished with their investigation. That might mean, I presume, that this will be weeks away.
Do you think they should be released sooner than that (INAUDIBLE)?
MCDONALD: I can't comment on the timing of their release. We're happy to have them released when the city and the police department officials who are responsible for those decisions decide that it's appropriate to do so.
Yes?
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
MCDONALD: We have not talked about that. Quite frankly, we've been so busy answering your calls and e-mails, that we haven't had a chance to develop a post-press conference strategy. We will be doing that in a timely fashion, and we'll consider all things on the table.
Yes?
QUESTION: Have you made a decision on (OFF-MIKE)?
MCDONALD: We have not.
QUESTION: Were you approached by Professor Gates (OFF-MIKE)?
MCDONALD: We're happy to speak to anyone on this matter in a position of responsibility or involvement, and that would include Professor Gates if he wanted to speak with us.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
MCDONALD: As I said, we've been more than busy arranging for this press conference, responding to the media. We will be meeting, following this press conference, in the coming days to develop a strategy going forward, and that's certainly one of the issues that we'll consider.
Yes?
QUESTION: You have an extraordinary breadth of law enforcement experience here on the podium today. I'd be interested to hear from all of you, what is the pressure (ph) generally for arresting someone for disorderly conduct?
This is a gentleman who was in his own home. It was established that he had not broken in. He allegedly was being outspoken, perhaps obnoxious. All the people on this podium have been in law enforcement for many years. Have any of you made a similar arrest in similar circumstances?
MCDONALD: Well, first, let me ask Tom Drexler (ph), attorney Tom Drexler (ph), who is on my left. He's an attorney consultant to both unions on these matters, and I would ask him to comment generally on the issue of arrest for that conduct. TOM DREXLER (ph), ATTORNEY: Let me say this -- I'm proud to represent members of the Patrolman's Associations and here to offer whatever support that we can.
I will say this -- from a legal standpoint, having spent 30 years in the business of prosecuting, as well as defending many individuals, including police officers, anyone will tell you, any law professor, any judge, any prosecutor, any defense attorney, that one of the most difficult crimes to define and to categorize is the crime of disorderly person. And it has been the subject of so much litigation over the years.
But I want to remind everybody that when a police officer makes a decision to make an arrest on the street, he or she does not have the luxury of studying law books, pondering the hundreds, if not thousands, of cases that form the precedent for this particular crime to determine whether or not every nuance -- for example, there has to be some threat of disruption. There has to be a commotion. There has to be citizens who are disturbed by this. There is some evidence, apparently, that citizens were attracted to this location.
You could find hundreds of lawyers who would debate the ups and downs and the merits and demerits of any disorderly person arrest. The police officer on the ground, if you will, on the spot of making those decisions, does not have that luxury or ability. If you review Sergeant Crowley's report, I think you would find many lawyers who would agree that the evidence presented therein would be sufficient to make an arrest.
I also would like to emphasize another point. District Attorney Leone, in his discretion, determined that he wasn't -- Byron (ph) asked this earlier -- going to go forward with this case. And he has many considerations, I'm sure, with regard to trial length, judicial resources, and the like, that he has to consider in a situation like this.
But at no time has he concluded, to my knowledge -- and I don't believe this to be the case -- that anybody -- that Sergeant Crowley did anything wrong here. So, his decision to not go forward with those charges is not the same as a finding that anyone did anything wrong here. I want to emphasize that, because that is not the case. He has simply made a decision not to go forward.
But again, that is a big difference between that. And I think some people are attempting to interpret that as meaning a finding of wrongdoing. Far from it. That has not happened, and I don't believe will happen in these circumstances.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE), that the governor, as well as the president, something you had mentioned in there (ph). What precisely was it that the governor said that was insulting to police officers?
MCDONALD: You know, he's made two or three comments about this.
The first interview in which he gave an opinion of the matter, he expressed the fact that he was disturbed by the arrest. And we took from that a pejorative connotation.
QUESTION: What is it -- you talked about the president and governor speaking. What is it that you believe they don't understand about this case that you want them to know?
MCDONALD: Well, let me take the president's remarks first.
First of all, he began his comments by saying he had a personal bias and that he didn't have all of the facts. As Dennis so artfully indicated, the next sentence should have been, "So I'm not going to say anything." Unfortunately, he proceeded to say some things.
He said that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in taking the actions they did. We think that that conclusion was dead wrong, and that if he knew all of the facts, he would have concluded that had Professor Gates simply cooperated with the investigation that Sergeant Crowley was undertaking, Sergeant Crowley could have cleared the matter and returned to his office, where he wanted to be, doing his regular work.
So, in our view, there was nothing stupid about what happened. What happened, to produce a different outcome, was directly under the control of Professor Gates. And that's something that I think the president does not fully appreciate.
And second, and more important, the president suggested that somehow -- at least implied -- there was a link between what happened here and the history of problems between persons of color and law enforcement. And while that well is true in some localities, it isn't true in Cambridge. It wasn't true in this case.
It was inappropriate for him to draw that comparison. And, you know, whether you can debate the propriety of the arrest based upon the technical aspects of the disorderly persons statute, there is no evidence whatsoever that the arrest was race-based.
QUESTION: Have you spoken to or sought to speak to the governor?
MCDONALD: Well, you've got a long list of things for us to do, sir. And I'm sure we'll get to them when we have time.
Over there.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
MCDONALD: It's not within our control. That's within the control of the Cambridge Police Department and the city of Cambridge. We welcome their release, and we believe they will be released when it's appropriate to do so.
Yes, sir?
QUESTION: Sergeant O'Connor said -- used the words "misdirected by the president." Who did he mean it should have been directed to? MCDONALD: Well, I -- yes, I think that's open for interpretation.
QUESTION: That's what I'm asking.
MCDONALD: And perhaps it would be best to let Sergeant O'Connor handle that. However, I won't put him in that position. My belief is that he intended that remark to refer to Professor Gates.
QUESTION: What do you know about the previous break-in?
MCDONALD: We only know from the reports and from a comment made by Professor Gates at the scene that there was a prior break-in in that building within the recent past.
QUESTION: Looking over this -- looking over this in hindsight, do you think, does the group think, that it would have been best for Sergeant Crowley to simply walk away?
MCDONALD: Well, you know, as Attorney Drexler (ph) said, you're asking us to second-guess someone on the scene of a situation that he's entered not knowing what danger is present, whether it's a home invasion, whether it's a serious domestic violence situation, whether it's a burglary. He's encountering a lack of cooperation -- excuse me. I'm trying to answer your question, sir.
He encountered a full lack of cooperation. It was fully within his discretion when that behavior persisted to make the arrest, and we're not going to second-guess that decision.
Yes?
QUESTION: Are you concerned at all that by not arresting him, that would have perhaps set a precedent and undermined the police force?
MCDONALD: Well, that's certainly a consideration, that Officer Crowley, Sergeant Crowley, was entitled to make, at least to in part inform his decision-making.
QUESTION: Do you think this will change the way you respond to other calls like this in the future, not just Cambridge police, but departments all across Massachusetts, and perhaps the country, especially when you have a president weighing in on the way that these officers make decisions? What's going to be happening now with this?
MCDONALD: OK. Last question. Last answer.
We are concerned about that.
Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We want to thank everyone for coming today. Thank you very much.
HARRIS: Whoa. OK. Alan McDonald, legal counsel, Cambridge Police.
All right. How to proceed? How to move forward?
As you heard, Alan McDonald is asking for an apology not just from the president of the United States for his comments about the case, but also from the governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick. Both of those two men have acknowledged their friendship with Professor Gates.
And there is Crowley in the middle of the screen right there. Was present, but didn't offer any comments.
At one point, Alan McDonald suggesting that the president sort of shot from the hip with his remarks. Yes, without having all of the facts moving forward.
I don't know why I was under the impression that this news conference, that by the end of it we would be closer to resolving this. I don't know why I thought that, but clearly, it looks like we may be more entrenched at this point with Cambridge police unions. The legal counsel for Cambridge police saying very clearly that they support the actions of the officer in this case and want an apology from the president.
Don Lemon was in the room for this.
I thought this was pretty extraordinary, Don.
I was just saying a moment ago that, I don't know why, for whatever reason, I was in our meeting this morning and I thought by the end of this news conference, that we would be working closer to that moment when perhaps Sergeant Crowley and Professor Gates would be patching this thing up together. But I tell you what, it just feels like the divide, if it started here, it just got wider and wider and wider with each comment.
What are your thoughts in the room?
DON LEMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I'm surprised that you thought that. I mean, Tony, you've been doing this just as long as I have.
HARRIS: Yes.
LEMON: I knew that there would be some fallout after I -- after it was told to me that the Superior Officers Association was going to have a press conference. I think they are very concerned with Gates' comments after the incident.
They feel that it's been very one-sided, you know, to be honest with you, in the media about Gates. You've been hearing about Gates, but you haven't been hearing that much about the officer. Part of that, though, is the department's own fault, because they haven't really been transparent or allowing any of their officers to talk, and they didn't want Sergeant Crowley to speak as well. But as you saw, every -- just the sense of the community, as I got here yesterday and I went directly to the police department, you could sort of feel it in the air. The police commissioner said to me, morale is low here.
HARRIS: Yes.
LEMON: And it was -- you know, it was better before the president made his comments.
HARRIS: Well, Don, can I say something?
LEMON: They got low -- even lower after that because...
HARRIS: Yes.
LEMON: Well, hang on. Hang on. It got even lower after that because they thought that this was going to go away after a while, after the news cycle. But then once the president responded to it, they feel that it brought it back up again. And not only brought it back up, amped it up to a different level.
HARRIS: Gotcha. I gotcha. I get that. I get that. But here's my point. This is incendiary. Race in this country is powerfully incendiary.
LEMON: Yes.
HARRIS: And I suppose I thought that both sides of this would take a step back, not listen to the news cycle.
LEMON: Yes.
HARRIS: Not base future comments on the last news cycle and make a determination that race is such a powerful . . .
LEMON: But, Tony . . .
HARRIS: Let me finish the thought. Is such a powerful factor in this country, that it would be better to take a step back and try to figure out a way to mend this.
LEMON: Yes.
HARRIS: Not deepen it.
LEMON: That's what advisers on both sides are saying. Advisors from outside on both sides are saying, hey, listen, guys, tone down the rhetoric.
HARRIS: Take down the temperature on this.
LEMON: Take down the temperature on this and relax a little. Because, you know, the law enforcement community, we know, it is a community that bands together. It's very vocal. They're very protective and insular of their own. As well they should be. As well most people are.
And the same thing, when you have -- when you're talking about race, and especially African-American men and their relationship to police officers. I mean, most African-American men in this country have had some sort of incident, perceived or real, about feelings about being racially profiled.
HARRIS: OK and let me stop . . .
LEMON: I, for one, have had one that . . .
HARRIS: Yes, let me tee it up. Don, let me tee it up. Here's the thing.
LEMON: Yes.
HARRIS: And I say this because I want us to conduct this discussion here with total transparency. I know that you have had an incident in your life, and I'll let you explain it. But as you make these comments, I want folks to understand, you are working as a correspondent on this story, but you have had something in your life that doesn't -- that may be -- no, let me have you explain the incident and folks can make their own determination.
LEMON: No, I just thought it was complete transparency. I mean, we all have our lives. You know, we all have the lens that we come through. And my -- I didn't have anything with a police officer. It was something to do with something else, but there was racial profiling. It was settled out of court. I was right. The other party was wrong. And we settled out of court.
But here's the thing, everyone has incidents in their lives. And you have to judge each of them on the merits and on the circumstances. I'm sure there are many incidents where there are racially -- people are racially profiled and claim to be and it's accurate. And there are other incidents where people are -- who believe they are racially profiled and it is not.
Even with an incidents like that happening to me and to many other African-Americans and Latino, let's not forget, Latino, brown people, even with that, you still have to judge every single incident on the merits. There's always -- you know, we always say there's two sides to every story. Well, there's more than two sides to every story. As many people as you had witness, there can be eight sides to the story.
So you just have to -- you know, and it went away. I want to say that. Mine went away. The police officers, you know, came. They were great. So and I have great friends who are police officers. I've won awards for doing police officer stories. So I know there's good and bad on every side. But this is -- I think this is only going to ramp up now, though, Tony.
HARRIS: I agree with you. And that's where I want to bring it back to. I thought there was an opportunity here -- that's all I'm suggesting -- for us to begin to turn something of a corner. But when you hear statements in this news conference where the suggestion is that if anyone acted stupid or stupidly, it was Professor Gates.
LEMON: Right.
HARRIS: You're digging the hole deeper. You're lining up the forces on either side of this.
LEMON: Right.
HARRIS: And people are be -- are going to become more entrenched in their views. And where you are on this spectrum here is probably dependent largely on the kind of experiences you've had with police officers, and whether or not you're black or you're white in this country. And that was I think the opportunity missed to start to bridge this thing. And I'm not sure that that happened in this news conference. That's my only point. I'll give you the last word on it.
LEMON: Well, it depends on your lens. Everyone comes to -- into life in situations.
HARRIS: Well, that's what I just -- yes, that's what I just said.
LEMON: Yes, everyone comes through with their own, you know, history and notions and they look at view life through their own lens. But I just want to say this. The reason I said that -- I think this is going to ramp up.
And I think that you're right in this, that it should -- take down the volume because when I spoke to Professor Gates' attorney this morning, before he jumped on an airplane, he said that his reaction, his client's reaction, whether or not he's going to sue, will depend on how the police department handles it. They don't want the police department making his client out to be some crazy guy who went off on a police officer and lost his mind for a moment.
HARRIS: Yes, no, I got it.
LEMON: And if they do that, they said that the officer has been with the police department for a long time and it is open records and he will bring people forward who have had similar experiences to Professor Gates' by (ph) the same office.
HARRIS: And, Don, my last thought on this. There were choices here for Professor Gates. There were choices for this office.
LEMON: For the officer.
HARRIS: Absolutely. And, you know, other choices, we don't have this huge event. And, you're right, it is going to get bigger.
Don, let's leave it there for now. I know you'll be joining Kyra in just a couple of minutes.
LEMON: Thank you, sir.
HARRIS: And, Don, good back-and-forth. I love that. Thank you.
LEMON: All right. Thank you.
HARRIS: Still to come in the NEWSROOM, how is the transition in Iraq going as local forces take over security responsibilities from U.S. and coalition forces? The U.S. general who is responsible for making it work talked to our Arwa Damon. We will talk to Arwa live in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARRIS: Another deadly day for U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Two more troops were killed in an insurgent attack in the southern part of the country. The military has not said if it happened in the turbulent Helmand province. A Marine died there yesterday during battles with the Taliban. He is identified as Sergeant Ryan Lane. The 25-year-old from Pittsburgh is seen here giving candy to an Afghan child. The latest casualties -- I mean, 37 U.S. troops have died this month in Afghanistan. It is the deadliest month there for American forces.
The man calling the shots for American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan is right now in Iraq. General David Petraeus assessing the transition of security duties from coalition to Iraqi troops. Live now to CNN's Arwa Damon in Baghdad.
And, Arwa, if you would, share some of the conversation you had with the general.
ARWA DAMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Tony, of course, we asked him how he felt this transition was going. He did say that he felt that the Iraqi security forces were doing a pretty good job at holding their ground. He also is here to access these reports, stories, we've been hearing about friction between U.S. and Iraqi troops as American soldiers try to adjust to this new role. But given the extent of his expertise here in Iraq and now the global perspective that he has, we put to him the question as to what lessons learned in Iraq could potentially be applied to the conflict in Afghanistan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: The lessons that we have learned here about counterinsurgency -- and there have been many over the years, as you know, because, again, it wasn't just the surge. It wasn't just 30,000 more forces here, it was the employment of those forces in a manner that focused on security of the people and did it by living with the people and then also sought to help the process of reconciliation because you cannot kill or capture your way out of this kind of endeavor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DAMON: And one of the other factors that allowed the surge to work here is a strategy that we are seeing, he said, being repeated in Helmand province, that you mentioned, just there. And that is the clear hold and build. Sending in U.S. forces to certain areas, clearing it of an insurgency and then leaving them behind so that they can hold that crucial ground. Another factor that had a great impact on the conflict here was bringing Iraq's Sunni insurgency into the fold. They had grown largely disgruntled, displeased with al Qaeda. The U.S. did extend a hand to them and they are now trying to begin, if possible, to reapply that strategy to the Taliban. But that might prove to be a bit more challenging.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETRAEUS: I think it's a little bit difficult to imagine senior Taliban leaders agreeing to the kinds of conditions that one would want in reconciliation at a time when they are on the offensive in certain respects, although obviously our offensive now has them on the defensive in certain areas. But, again, I think we have to be careful with our expectations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DAMON: Still, he said that they were beginning to -- just beginning to reach out to low- and mid-level Taliban commanders. In the same fashion that here in Iraq they reached out to the mid and lower level members of the Sunni insurgency. Not going after the top leadership of al Qaeda.
We also spoke about how everything was interconnected, from the Pakistani Taliban, to what's happening in Afghanistan, to the al Qaeda cells that are here in Iraq that are in the Arab peninsula, that now have their headquarters in Yemen. And, of course, we spoke about Iraq. Because, he said, Iraq is central to this global war on terror and that is why it is so important that Iraq remains stable.
Tony.
HARRIS: Terrific stuff. Arwa Damon for us in Baghdad.
Arwa, good to see you again. Thank you.
A once-vibrant towns heads into the history books, but does anyone care if Hobson City, Alabama, disappears? I head to this tiny town to find out why it matters and who's trying to save it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARRIS: OK. Mobile web use on the rise. It's what we're talking about today in our "What Matters" segment in partnership with "Essence" magazine. You know, when it comes to surfing the net, blacks more likely than white to go online while on the go. The Pew Research Center found that blacks are the most active mobile Internet users with almost half having at one time accessed the web on a cell phone or other hand-held device. Although two-thirds of whites have home broadband connections, only 28 percent have used the mobile web.
While President Obama has a high approval rating among blacks, more and more feel race relations have not improved since he took office. According to a recent CNN/"Essence" magazine poll, 96 percent of blacks approve of how he is handling his presidency, but 55 percent think racial discrimination is a very serious problem. That is up from a post-presidential election rate of 38 percent.
Hobson City, Alabama, is a tiny town. What makes it so special is that it was founded by black leaders at a time when racism was rampant. It became a haven for black families in Alabama. Now it is headed for the history books. As part of our "What Matters" series, I went to Hobson City to meet the people trying to save it.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARRIS (voice-over): Images of a town time has truly forgotten. Everywhere, boarded-up homes and businesses, broken windows, along the street renamed Martin Luther King Drive. A much different picture than when residents say Hobson City, Alabama, was a great place to call home for blacks in the segregated south.
DR. DAVID SATCHER, FORMER SURGEON GENERAL: Had a black mayor, black sheriff and all that. And for many of us, that was very interesting coming from the environment that we came from.
HARRIS: One of America's black surgeons generals, Dr. David Satcher, graduated from a high school in Hobson City.
SATCHER: It played a very key role during that period of segregation to have -- to see leadership, to see black leadership.
HARRIS: This two-mile-long sliver of land an hour east of Birmingham was founded by blacks for blacks in 1899. An historically significant accomplishment in a state like Alabama with its notorious racial history.
It became a city when blacks were kicked out of the neighboring town because the black vote turned an election. Even segregationist Governor George Wallace showed up to a groundbreaking of the town during a failed re-election bid.
HARRIS (on camera): Is the idea of Hobson City, the first black city in Alabama, does that mean more to you, your generation, than it does to the young people we were watching just a few minutes ago playing?
ERIC STRINGER, GREW UP IN HOBSON CITY: Absolutely. We grew up in the '60s with the civil rights struggle. And so we know that -- we know the sacrifices that our families made so that we can live the way we live now.
HARRIS (voice-over): Today, where there were once dozens of black-owned businesses, there are only three. This small print shop, a barber shop, and a gas station/convenience store.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Half the city was vibrant. The park had a baseball park, pavilions, where they danced. And you could stand around on the outside and look on the inside.
HARRIS: Now, all that's long gone. The decay has been decades in the making. This empty shell of a building is what's left of Hobson City's fire department. There is no police department. Drug dealing is rampant.
HARRIS (on camera): You don't have a police force do you?
MAYOR ALBERTA MCCROY, HOBSON CITY, ALABAMA: We don't have a police force.
HARRIS: Is that a problem? Do you -- is crime a problem?
MCCROY: It is. It's -- crime is a serious problem in this community.
HARRIS (voice-over): What killed Hobson City? The town's leaders say, ironically, it may have been the civil rights movement. Desegregation meant freedom to shop and live anywhere. So many blacks left Hobson City behind.
HARRIS (on camera): So you think desegregation hurt Hobson City?
MCCROY: I think it did. And, in fact, it's not just Hobson City. But I look in other African-American communities where you have your grocery stores that really provided for the people in the community.
HARRIS (voice-over): Eric Stringer and Bernard Snow are determined to restore Hobson City to some of its past luster. They founded the Hobson City Community and Economic Development Corporation.
HARRIS (on camera): You could have just let it go.
BERNARD SNOW, GREW UP IN HOBSON CITY: No. No.
STRINGER: No.
HARRIS: You could have allowed it to be absorbed by Adiston (ph) or absorbed by Oxford (ph).
STRINGER: Nobody wants it.
HARRIS: That was never an option. Nobody wants it?
STRINGER: Nobody wants it.
SNOW: Well, from my perspective, I didn't want anybody else to write Hobson City's history or legacy.
STRINGER: It just needs some little successes.
HARRIS (voice-over): Last month, their group drew up a plan to bring in a tax base and draw new residents back into the community. The group has applied for state and federal grants. While they await a response, they're reaching out to foundations and planning fund- raisers. Their vision?
SNOW: It's a business community that has a revenue tax base. There's a rich history here that we just don't want it to fade off (INAUDIBLE). (END VIDEOTAPE)
HARRIS: And you can learn more about Eric and Bernard's effort to save Hobson City and how you can help by going to the Web site at the bottom of your screen. It's www.hobsoncitycdc.org.
And still to come, the effort to protect our homeland is coming home to roost in some very unlikely places, such as a historic barge canal in Pennsylvania. We're back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARRIS: Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke squaring off over who should become the nation's consumer watchdog. Both appearing today before the House Financial Services Committee.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TIMOTHY GEITHNER, TREASURY SECRETARY: We propose to take away from the Fed today responsibility for setting, writing rules for consumer protection, and for enforcing those rules. And we propose to require the Fed receive written approval from the secretary of the Treasury before exercising its emergency lending authority.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: Well, Bernanke says the Federal Reserve is better suited to the task of protecting consumers. The proposal to create a consumer protection agency is part of a broader revamping of the nation's financial rules.
The Homeland Security Department does just that, protect the homeland. But you might be surprised by what the department considers a security concern. Our Jeanne Meserve tells us about the department's concerns over a historic barge attraction in Pennsylvania.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT, (voice-over): It's hard to imagine many things more peaceful than a leisurely barge boat ride on Pennsylvania's historic Lehigh Canal. But the long arm of Homeland Security has stretched even here.
MAYOR SAL PANTO, EASTON, PENNSYLVANIA: It has nothing to do with international security or national security. It has to do with some tourism and letting people relive our historic past. Certainly no threat to national security.
MESERVE: The mayor is upset that four historic reenactors at the Humore (ph) Historic Park, who handle the boat and the mules that pull it, had to go through the bother and expense of getting secure credentials called Transportation Worker Identity Cards, or TWIC.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Actually, it is ridiculous when you get right down to it.
MESERVE: The cards were mandated for all mariners after 9/11 to insure that port workers are not terrorists. So what needs protection around here? And who exactly are the terrorists?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our biggest threat is not the threat of man, it's the threat of the weather. The threat of natural forces. And muskrats.
MESERVE: The mules, Hank and George, certainly don't appear to be security risks.
PANTO: Well, the only thing they ask for is a couple meals a day and a new pair of shoes a year.
MESERVE: And as for the mule tenders, despite the hassle of going through federal background checks, they're largely amused at having their little tourist attraction treated like a major port.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We catch some little fish in the nets, as well as the big ones. And nobody threw us back.
MESERVE: The park had to divert $1,200 from its educational programs to pay for the cards. Five months ago, the local congressman urged the Homeland Security Secretary to find a commonsense solution.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's work with you on this particular case if we might.
MESERVE: But it hasn't happened.
COMMANDER DAVID MURK, U.S. COAST GUARD: The law is very clear. It's required for all U.S. licensed and documented mariners, which does not give us any leeway to make exemptions.
REP. CHARLES DENT, (R) PENNSYLVANIA: It makes absolutely no sense. This is simply a case of bureaucratic nonsense trumping common sense.
MESERVE: Congressman Dent is proposing legislation giving small operations, like this, an out.
MESERVE (on camera): But for now, the requirement for TWIC cards stands and some call that asinine.
Jeanne Meserve, CNN, Easton, Pennsylvania.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
