Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Charlie Rangel's Ethics Hearing; Congress Returns for Lame Duck Session; Deer Wanders Into Niagara Falls Supermarket; 10,000 Jellyfish Wash Ashore in San Francisco; Would-Be Bride Donates Wedding Reception Dinner to Homeless; Is "Sarah Palin's Alaska" Helping Her in the Polls?
Aired November 15, 2010 - 09:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks so much. 9:00 a.m. on the East Coast, 6:00 a.m. out west. I'm Kyra Phillips and here's some stories ahead us talking this morning.
This hour legendary Congressman Charlie Rangel faces one of the greatest challenges of his long-storied career. The White House Ethics Committee considering allegations that he violated tax and campaign rules.
The ballots now counted and Arizona voters have narrowly approved medical marijuana. Arizona is the 15th state to do so. The state will regulate about 120 clinics to sell weed and patients living more than 25 miles from a site will be allowed to grow their own.
And have you seen this video from Canada? A rodeo goes horribly wrong when a panicked bull leaps over a rail, lands in front of a row filled with spectators. Only four people injured, none of them seriously. Canadian Finals Rodeo says that it's the first time this has happened in 37 years.
We begin this hour with live pictures right now of Charlie Rangel. As you know he faces 13 allegations including failure to pay taxes on a home in the Dominican Republic, misusing or misuse, rather, of rent- controlled apartment in New York for political purposes, and improperly using the government's mail service and his congressional letterhead.
He calls his actions may be stupid, maybe negligent but not corrupt. He's well known for his flamboyance and that will probably be on full display today as we get ready to watch this morning's opening statements. He'll probably be passionate, just as passionate as that speech he delivered on the House floor in August. Remember this?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. CHARLIE RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: Hey, if was you I may want me to go away, too. I am not going away.
The Ethics Committee won't even tell me when I'm going to have a hearing. And heck, people who are concerned about me, I'm 80 years old. I don't want to die before the hearing.
(END OF VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Again live pictures of that hearing now getting under way right as you can see on Capitol Hill. And that's also where we find our CNN congressional correspondent Brianna Keilar.
So Brianna, we're seeing him come into the room now. He's getting ready to sit down. What exactly is going to happen today, this week, and what could be the possible outcomes?
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: We're expecting a lot of what he's going to say in his opening statement, Kyra, and you know, it's been reported. We know for sure that Charlie Rangel will be representing himself. That he e doesn't have a lawyer.
It's been reported that it really came down to money issues and we are expecting him in his opening statement to address those questions. But this is a process that's really shrouded in a whole lot of secrecy.
The Ethics Committee is notoriously tight-lipped about exactly how things are going to play out and really how long this might take. Presumably it could take a week. But what we do know is it's really going to play out like a trial and the big moment is going to be Charlie Rangel in his opening statement.
It's really expected to mirror some of that 37-minute floor speech that he gave, that indignant floor speech that he gave in August. And this will play out like a trial. The prosecution, which is going to be the Ethics Committee, they have staff lawyers who are going to make their case.
And then for Rangel's side, he is going to be representing himself. The jury here really is eight members of the Ethics Committee. Four of them Democrats, four of them Republicans.
And the end result here is going to be potentially some sort of admonishment. There is a technical term for different levels of what Rangel could be facing here for these alleged violations. But we're not necessarily expecting him to be expelled.
And when it really comes down to the different types of rebukes that he could get, Kyra, perhaps I think the harshest punishment is going to be essentially this public humiliation in a way that could play out in this trial because this is of course quite a spectacle.
And even though you see Rangel coming in with a smile on his face, this is a rare and unusual and tough situation for a lawmaker to be in -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well, and it's going to be interesting to watch this all go down as he represents himself as well.
We're going to stay on this live picture, Brianna. We know that you're going to stay with us, too, as we follow this and as soon as Rangel starts speaking we will take it live. And as you know, Congress is back and lawmakers do have a long to-do list. Tax cuts, military policy, spending bills.
But this is a lame duck session. And a lot of unseated lawmakers are cleaning out their desks as those freshmen move in.
Senior congressional correspondent Dana Bash is live in D.C.
So, Dana, these are the last few weeks of the 111th Congress. So what do you think? Is anything even going to get done?
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, there certainly is a long, long to-do list that these members of Congress have to try to get done in these remaining weeks before the end of the year while they're in session.
It ranges from everything from keeping the government running which I think we could probably count on them actually getting through, to making sure that doctors who are going to lose money when they deal with patients who are getting Medicare that they don't lose that money. That might be something they get through.
But there are probably a dozen other things that are on the list that Democratic and Republican sources, Kyra, say they just don't think it's going to happen.
PHILLIPS: Well, and the new members of Congress at Capitol Hill here today for orientation, what exactly are they going to learn today?
BASH: They are going to learn the 101 of what it means and what it takes to be a member of Congress. Really, everything that goes into it. Everything from the ethics rules that they're going to have to abide by, to how to set up an office, to how to cast a vote.
In fact on that note, casting a vote -- right behind me we have seen some of these newly elected members. And we're talking nearly 100 of them. They have been coming in and out of this door because they are getting their photos taken for what will be their vote cards, the cards that they will use to actually cast their votes.
But besides the mechanics of it, they are also looking at the promises that they made in the campaign and how they can keep their promises. I talked to a couple of newly elected Republicans who were members of the Tea Party.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. TIM SCOTT (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: We have to make sure that we set the expectations for what we're able to accomplish, realizing that we have a bifurcated system where we the Republicans controlling one House, with the Democrats and the White House control the other party.
REP. RAUL LABRADOR (R), IDAHO: We have the majority in the House. And at least in the House of Representatives I think we have to pass something that reduces the debt, reduces the deficit and has lower spending. We have to keep those promises.
(END OF VIDEO CLIP) BASH: They know a lot of pressure on them because they know that they were swept in pretty quickly and they can probably be swept out in a couple of years just as fast -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well, tell you what, you mentioned they're going to be learning about ethics. They've got some hands-on I guess live training right there watching Charlie Rangel today, Dana.
BASH: Yes.
PHILLIPS: Yes. All right. We'll be following that. Thank you so much, Dana.
BASH: Thanks, Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well, airline security checkpoints are getting tense across country. People are mad as hell about those full body scanners. And some are taking a stand.
Check out this confrontation between a California man and TSA officials in San Diego. It's actually gone viral.
Thirty-one-year-old software engineer John Tyner was going on a hunting trip with his father-in-law on Saturday. Well, he refused the full body scan, then he turned on his cell phone, video camera and pressed record.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: Come on over here.
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: Do you have anything in your pockets?
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: I don't think so. They had me take it all out.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: No belt? No nothing..
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: No. No belt, no nothing.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: Do you have external or internal implants that I need to be aware of?
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: No.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: We're going to be doing the standard pat- down on you today, using my hands going like this.
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: Also we're going to do a groin check. That means I'm going to place my hand on your hip, the other hand on your inner thigh, slowly go up, and slide down.
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: OK.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: We're going to do that two times in the front and two times in the back.
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: And if you would like a private screening we can make that available for you also.
UNIDENTIFIED PASSENGER: We can do that out here but if you touch my junk I'm going to have you arrested.
UNIDENTIFIED TSA OFFICIAL: Actually, we're going to have a supervisor here because of your statement.
(END OF VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Well, Tyner never made it to the hunting trip, by the way. Supervisors were called in. And he says he's now facing a $10,000 fine and a possible civil suit.
Meanwhile, federal transportation officials are asking for passengers to just be patient. That's a topic of our "AM Extra." We're going to hear what TSA -- administrator, rather, John Pistole has to say about it coming up in just about half an hour.
When snow came down the lights went out. And it's not even winter yet but parts of the upper Midwest are digging out of a big weekend snowstorm.
This is the Twin Cities area. Thousands of customers out of power, as much as 12 inches of snow fell in parts of that region.
Well, I guess it's good from a skiing perspective, Rob Marciano, but not -- and the kids making snowmen and all that other good stuff. But --
ROB MARCIANO, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yes, I know. We like to make a snowman before Thanksgiving, right?
PHILLIPS: Amen. But the power's out, not a good thing.
MARCIANO: You know -- yes, because it's so -- it's wet. Not only does it hang on to trees, in some cases still have some leaves on it and that will snap some of the tree limbs. But also -- you know it doesn't stick around too terribly long because the ground is still warm this time of year.
(WEATHER REPORT)
MARCIANO: Yes, I wouldn't mind making a snowman right about now. That'd be kind of fun.
PHILLIPS: Yes. It'd be fun. And you're right -- one of my friends lives in the Twin Cities so I can just imagine she's got those kids all bundled up in their little snow suits and their little books and they're out there knocking each other down with the snow fall.
MARCIANO: Yes. They ramp up early for it.
PHILLIPS: Every now and then we get snow here, though. Once every five years.
MARCIANO: Maybe this year. Maybe this will be our year.
PHILLIPS: OK. Thanks, Rob.
MARCIANO: All right.
PHILLIPS: So you a Sarah Palin fan?
MARCIANO: Well, I think it's good TV.
PHILLIPS: Can she see snow from her backyard?
MARCIANO: I'm sure she can.
(LAUGHTER)
PHILLIPS: Well, she and Todd and Track and Trig and Willow and Bristol, well, they're all part of a new reality show. Rob's going to TiVo it. Co-star in the state of Alaska. The show is today's "Talker." We're going to find out if the former governor has an even bigger role in mind like maybe a reality show to presidential candidate?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Heading "Cross Country," our first stop Niagara Falls, New York where a disoriented deer wandered into a local supermarket.
Now watch closely. You'll actually see one customer literally running for the doors to get away from the pursuing deer. Now the buck followed, and then crashed a window or two before making a pretty hasty exit out of there.
Now to San Francisco where more than 10,000 jellyfish mysteriously washed ashore on Ocean Beach. Kind of looks like a cobblestone walkway of the jellyfish. Strong surf may have been the cause.
Last stop, suburban Colorado Springs, Colorado, where a bunch of well-fed homeless folks probably want to kiss the would-be bride who treated them to an unexpected feast. A last minute marriage cancellation prompted her to reach out to the local Salvation Army and feed the hungry with what was supposed to be her wedding reception dinner.
Sarah Palin, you've seen her on the campaign trail, on the book tour, on Facebook a lot. Now you can see her in her natural habitat, where BlackBerrys grow wild.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) PIPER PALIN, SARAH PALIN'S DAUGHTER: My mom is super busy. She is addicted to the BlackBerry. She's like, "Hang on, Piper. I'll be there in a second."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Yes, now you can see Sarah Palin's house from your own living room, maybe while you polish off a bowl of moose track ice cream. "Sarah Palin's Alaska" is now on the Learning Channel. The reality of her new reality show might be that she's getting primed for a presidential run. The show is today's Talker, and CNN's Jim Acosta is talking about it with us. We're definitely seeing the other side of Sarah Palin, I guess, kind of. What a way to gear up for the presidency, a reality TV show.
JIM ACOSTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right. And the question that could be asked about this, Kyra, can Sarah Palin see 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue from her house? And my guess is that yes, she can.
At this point, all of this talk about her reality TV show is mainly going to be about the Palin family. You see a lot of the Palin family in this TV show. There isn't much politics going on. You do hear a little bit of the Palins griping about this journalist, Joe McGinniss, who moved in next door to their house in Alaska. And Todd Palin built a 15-foot fence to keep the two apart, and Sarah Palin compares this to border security with Mexico.
So, there's just a little bit of politics mixed in to the reality TV show stuff there. But mainly this is about the Palin family enjoying the great outdoors which, in one case, included a real life momma grizzly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SARAH PALIN, "SARAH PALIN'S ALASKA": I love watching these momma bears. They've got a nature, yes, that humankind can learn from. She's trying to show her cubs, "Nobody's going to do it for you. You get out there and do it yourself, guys."
PIPER PALIN: Roar.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ACOSTA: Yes, and there's Piper Palin doing her best grizzly roar there. All of the timing of this is very conspicuous, Kyra. This show runs eight weeks, it'll wrap up in mid-January, which is right around the time when a lot of top Republicans who are thinking about running for president ultimately take that plunge. So, this could time out where, essentially, she is priming herself for a White House run with this show.
PHILLIPS: What do you think? Is the show really helping her? We don't know what the ratings were.
ACOSTA: Right. PHILLIPS: I guess we'll find that out tomorrow, right? But polls recently show that she's still a pretty divisive figure.
ACOSTA: She really is. There are some polls that just came out in the last few days that still show this, two years after the 2008 presidential campaign. She's a very polarizing figure. A recent AP poll shows 49 percent of Americans view her unfavorably. That versus 46 percent who have a favorable view. And there's a Gallup poll that came out just recently that showed a 52 percent unfavorable view.
But check out the number that is really important in all of this, and I think that is how Republicans see Sarah Palin, and unbelievable number from the AP poll, 79 percent of Amer -- of Republicans, excuse me, have a favorable view of Sarah Palin versus 17 percent.
Why is that important? Well, if she's thinking about running for president, she first has to win the Republican nomination. And if that many Republicans like her, that is a very good sign. And keep in mind, we're not just going to be seeing Sarah Palin on this reality TV show. She's got another book coming out, Kyra, here in the coming weeks. And she's going to be going on a 16-state book tour. Two of the states on that itinerary are Iowa and South Carolina, two very important presidential battlegrounds, Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well, we know that you'll be following it for us, Jim.
ACOSTA: You bet.
PHILLIPS: Thanks so much.
As we head to break, live pictures once again. Charlie Rangel getting ready here -- actually, it looks like he is addressing the committee at his ethics hearing. We are going to dip into this live, follow it for you, as he faces 13 allegations, including failure to pay taxes, and also misusing a rent-controlled apartment in New York among other things. We are following this live and will take it in full sound after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Live pictures once again from the Hill. Charlie Rangel facing 13 allegations for improperly using government services, also misusing a rent-controlled apartment in New York for political purpose, in addition to failure to pay his taxes on a home in the Dominican Republic.
Let's listen in for a second.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
REP. CHARLIE RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: Quite frankly, committee members, this is the very reason that the Chair has given to me that pains me the most as to why. I'm not entitled to a good life. I'm not entitled to a postponement, because this matter could not be resolved before the end of this session of Congress. Can you tell me under what theory of fairness dictates that I be denied due process, that I be denied an attorney because there is going to be the end of this session? When we know that I would be entitled if we had more time. That's what you're saying.
What does it mean that we have Thanksgiving and Christmas and perhaps congressional trip, preparing for the next Congress? How far does this go to a person not having counsel, not having due process because we don't have time.
Well, I think we ought to find the time. I'm prepared to stay here, to get counsel, and to have a hearing on this. What prevents us from doing it? And then to add that as I stand before you, I have no idea as to how counsel intends to proceed.
A week ago, 80 pages of what could be considered summary judgment, I think would indicate that this committee may not be prepared to call witnesses. That this committee would ask that a judgment be made based on admissions and exhibits. I have no lawyer to look at this. But to me, it just --
(END OF COVERAGE)
PHILLIPS: Charlie Rangel is very well known for his flamboyance. It was on fully display a number of months ago, when he took the floor to defend himself about ethics violations. Now, as the trial has begun, we're getting conflicting reports that he's asking for a postponement of this, wanting to set up a legal defense fund. Now possibly that might not be the case. John Avalon is watching it right along with us. John, are you able to clarify what's going on? Because it's sort of hard to hear him and make sense of what he's requested.
JOHN AVALON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: It is. It sounds like he's asked for a postponement due to the fact he is without counsel at the moment. That he has spent over $2 million in legal fees to date, his lawyers said, "You can't pay us anymore, we're not going to be with you." And he's saying that he needed more time to set up a legal defense fund in order to be represented by a lawyer at this first phase of the trial, what is known as an adjudicatory hearing.
But he's making a very impassioned speech to his colleagues, four Democrats, four Republicans, at this first stage of the trial. Talking about the essential unfairness of his situation being without counsel, saying that that he's longing for his day in court, that he wants the facts out, that his family's caught hell to date, but that this is an unfair situation because he's without counsel.
PHILLIPS: Didn't he make it clear that he was going to represent himself? That's what we had been talking about.
AVALON: That is what -- that we had all been under the assumption. But the committee chairwoman indicated that she was a bit surprised that he was sitting without counsel. And now, the crux of his opening statement is about his desire to have time to set up a legal defense fund. Now, he is a trained lawyer, it has been 40 years since he practiced, that's how long he's been in Congress, since 1970. But at the moment, he's making a very impassioned opening statement to his colleagues at this adjudicatory hearing.
PHILLIPS: What's the reality of them saying, "OK, sure, you got it, Congressman. You're up -- you face 13 allegations here of ethics violations, we'll go ahead and give you what you want and we'll postpone this." Really, what's the reality of that happening?
AVALON: I don't think it's very high. Again, this is an investigation that has taken over two years. The opening statement declared over 50 witnesses, 28,000 pages of documents, ultimately resulting in 13 counts. So, this has been coming down the pike for a very long time. And the idea that it would be delayed once again.
Remember, this initially was delayed to occur after the election, when it was scheduled to appear before. So, I don't think there's a lot -- great chance of likelihood for the committee taking sympathy on Congressman Rangel's request for a delay -- a further delay to set up time to set up a legal defense fund so he can be represented with counsel.
PHILLIPS: OK. Now, he finished his opening remarks, he sat down. What will happen from here? Are they going to consider this, or what do you think, John? I know we're kind of winging it here and playing it by ear.
AVALON: I'm sure they will consider briefly his request. But I don't -- I would be very surprised if they accepted it. Because again, all of the facts have been on the table for a very long time. There's very little element of surprise at this stage of the hearing.
And Congressman Rangel had previously announced his intention to represent himself due to the fact that he'd stopped paying his layers. And, indeed, one of the recent pieces of news that came out showed that he had a political action committee, which paid nearly $400,000 of legal fees, which is frowned upon, shall we say, is itself illegal. But that's a secondary issue.
These 13 counts have been long standing, and I would be highly surprised if this committee decided to delay again on Congressman Rangel's behalf.
PHILLIPS: Now it looks like there's some back and forth, John. Rangel standing up, addressing whatever it was they'd just said. We'll listen in. He's not miked very well, so what we'll do is we'll go back when members of the committee are addressing him and take that live and see if we can figure out what's happening. We're also monitoring it, of course, back in DC.
A quick question, though. If found guilty of any of these ethics violations, what would the consequences be? What are the possibilities for his future?
AVLON: There could be a wide range. Anything ranking from an official reprimand, to a fine, to a sensor (ph), to possibly removal, although, that's only occurred once before with Congressman Jim Traficant of Ohio, and that was a result of a criminal conviction. There is a wide range, but this is one of the deans of the New York delegation (ph), one of the longest serving members of Congress.
So, this is a moment with high drama and a high degree of personal tragedy considering his fall from grace. Just two years ago, you know, he was riding high as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, and now, it's come to this judiciary hearing at the opening stage of a trial.
PHILLIPS: All right. Let's step in and listen just for a second here. Members of the committee speaking.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ranking member McCall, members of the subcommittee, Representative Rangel. My name is Blake Chisholm (ph). I am the chief counsel for the committee. To my right is Debra Morris (ph), counsel to the committee, and to my left is Donald Sherman (ph), also counsel to the committee. This time Madame Chair, Is would move to introduce exhibits 1 through 549 into the record.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is there objection?
REP. CHARLIE RANGEL, (D) NEW YORK: Well, Madame Chair, if it pleases with all due respect, I'm not in a position to pass judgment on what counsel is about to do. I've never known that this proceeding even existed, a summary judgment if that's what he's about to do. Any lawyer that I've talked with have said that this committee has no --
REP. ZOE LOFGREN, (D) CALIFORNIA: If I may interrupt, Mr. Rangel, just to clarify this. There is, we were noticed as were you of the -- this motion. I would like to make clear, however, that we will hear the motion, the argument from the committee counsel and whatever argument you may choose to make, but that if you wish to be heard in an opening statement, if you wish to proceed with witnesses, we will hold any ruling on that motion in abeyance so that if you wish to be heard, we will hear you.
RANGEL: I appreciate the chance. Would that include the right for me to have a lawyer?
LOFGREN: You may hire whoever you wish as a lawyer. That is up to you.
RANGEL: Well, all I'm -- you've seen the record. Two million already. And I've been advised that this hearing could cost me another million. You've offered me the opportunity to have a legal defense fund, which would allow, perhaps, a lawyer to come into the case if that's what you're saying. There is nothing I would not yield to for that purpose. But you know that if you're saying that we can't move forward, then that restricts me from getting a lawyer.
Not only financially, but the legal defense fund that you suggested I would have would have no meaning at all. If what you're saying if there's anything I can do within the rules of the committee that would allow me to move forward with this. LOFGREN: Thank you.
RANGEL: Object to just the procedure, but I did not know until a week ago that this 80-page would be the way you intended to judge my conduct. A week ago. So, I can listen to what he is saying, but does this mean that he is going into this procedure that I don't have counsel to guide me?
LOFGREN: If I may, Mr. Rangel, if you could be seated. For clarification, the respondent has inquired of the committee whether a fund could be created where contributions could be made for legal representation and has been advised by the committee that that is permissible. However, the retention of counsel is up to the respondent whether you are to hire at your own expense, through your campaign committee or through a fund is your decision, not the committee's decision.
RANGEL: All I'm asking, I agree with you 100 percent Madame Chair. All I'm asking for is the time to get counsel. I have lawyers from Washington, D.C. and New York are willing to give me free counsel, to be able to come here because they don't think I've been treated fairly, and yet, they say that if they do that, it's a gift and violates all of the laws. I heard that perhaps they can do it at reduced fees or fair fees.
If only we had time to develop the committee, you tell me that I don't have time to do that. And so, while you tell me that yes, I can hire anybody, get anybody, not have a lawyer, you also saying and that's the third part of your letter, that time does not permit this matter to be concluded before the end of this session. And that's the nuts and bolts of what we're talking about. You tell me all of the things I could do, but you're not going to give me time to do it.
I think no one can say that that's not the way this ends up. Yes, I can do these things, but you have to conclude this now and the next day and my reputation, 50 years of public service, has to suffer because this committee has concluded that you must conclude this matter before this Congress ends. And all I'm asking for is time to get counsel. Time to get counsel and you're saying now, I think, that you denied it before, and you're denying it now.
LOFGREN: I gather that you do not object to the admission of the evidence that has been proffered by committee counsel. And therefore, the --
RANGEL: I object to the proceeding and I with all due respect. Since I don't have counsel to advise me, I'm going to have to excuse myself from these proceedings, because I have no idea what this man has put together. Over two years that was given to me last week, and I just hope that the history of this committee in terms of fairness would be judged for what it is.
So, with all due respect, and recognizing how awkward it is for the members of this committee, as colleagues and someone that would like to preserve the right of members to be judged by their peers, with counsel, I respectfully remove myself from these. REP. G.K. BUTTERFIELD, (D) NORTH CAROLINA: Madame Chair, before the respondent leaves, may I ask the chair an additional question.
LOFGREN: Certainly.
BUTTERFIELD: Even though the respondent did not specifically make a motion to continue this hearing, I deem his comments to be a motion to continue. And I would like this committee to seriously consider a motion to continue. I would like for us to do it in executive session and discuss among ourselves what the respondent has said, because I take his contention very seriously.
I served as a judge in my state for 15 years, and I know the importance of counsel, especially in this environment. And so, I'm going to ask that we deem his statements to be a motion to continue, and that we discuss it in executive session.
LOFGREN: All right. That is a request from one member to have a discussion on the -- well, your motion to --
BUTTERFIELD: I'll make a motion to continue the matter.
LOFGREN: To continue the matter.
BUTTERFIELD: And ask that we take it up in executive session.
LOFGREN: We will go into our closed session and have a brief discussion and then we will return.
BUTTERFIELD: Was there a second?
LOFGREN: Yes, there was.
BUTTERFIELD: There was a second to the motion. All right.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIPS: OK. We didn't think that was going to happen. We've been watching the House Ethics Committee, Congressman Charlie Rangel, as you know, facing 13 allegations including failure to pay his taxes, misusing a rent-controlled apartment for political purposes in New York, improperly using the government's mail service in his congressional letterhead. He has been very forward in calling his actions stupid and negligent, but he has, time and time again, said he is not corrupt.
We are playing sort of a guessing game when he stood up and said I want to postpone this. I need time to set up a legal defense fund. I need counsel and the committee was -- he might speak. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RANGEL: I don't think there's anything that I can say dependent on their response to my request of postponement or delay to right to counsel.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: All right. Congressman once again saying his only request was a right to counsel. But here's the question. OK. He went on and on and on, said he wanted to respectfully excuse himself, which he did, but the thing is, he knew about this hearing for months and said he was going to represent himself, at least, we were under the impression he was going to represent himself.
So, where do we go from here? What happens next? It's interesting to watch how this has all gone down. John Avlon, are you still with me?
AVLON: Yes, I am.
PHILLIPS: I knew I'd get a chuckle out of you because you were saying, OK, I highly doubt this is going to be postponed. And boy, did we get thrown a curveball there. We saw Butterfield, Representative Butterfield, who came forward and said I suggest we move this into executive session. I was a judge. I totally understand the importance of needing counsel.
But John Avlon, he's known about this for months and had made it clear he was just going to represent himself. And now, all of a sudden, he's sort of changing his tune.
AVLON: Absolutely. This is very much unexpected, a huge curveball from both Representative Rangel and the committee which is now moved to executive session to consider his request that it be postponed again. And this has been coming down the pike for a very long time, a two-year investigation, months this date has been on the calendar. Initially, it was supposed to be before the election and then postponed to this first day, the lame duck session.
So, now that Charlie Rangel is saying that he needs more time to put a legal defense fund to gather in order to have counsel. Now, previously, the crux of his argument seems to have been I was disorganized, I was negligent, but I'm not corrupt. And now, he's arguing effectively that in the absence of counsel, because he's already spent $2 million out of campaign funds to pay counsel to date that he is at a gross disadvantage, and that he needs time to put together a legal defense fund.
Now, surprisingly, this judiciary hearing is considering his request which initially seemed to come very much out of left field. We will see. But the very unexpected or high drama moment at this sort of American tragedy in our democracy going on today in Washington.
PHILLIPS: Well, we've always known Rangel to be high drama. That is for sure. You never know what he's going to do.
AVLON: Yes.
PHILLIPS: All right. John Avlon, we'll continue to follow. We'll see what happens. The committee going into executive session now to discuss what to do next. Charlie Rangel has excused himself. We'll follow the next step whatever that may be. Who knows when it comes to Congressman Charlie Rangel.
AVLON: We will.
PHILLIPS: Yes. Quick break. We'll be right back in CNN NEWSROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Well, airline passengers have learned to live with a lot of security rules over the years. Empty your pockets, remove your belt, take off your shoes. One cork size plastic bags, no more than three ounces of liquid for a container. You get the picture.
Full body scans seem to be the tipping point for one California man. Thirty-one year old software engineer, John Tyner refused that scan in San Diego. Then he taped the TSA's reaction. And the video has gone viral.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are going to be doing a standard pat down on you today, using my hands going like this.
JOHN TYNER, PASSENGER: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Also, we're going to be doing a groin check. That means I am going to place my hand on your hip, my other hand on your inner thigh. Slowly go up and slide down.
TYNER: Ok.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're going to do that two times in the front and two times in the back.
TYNER: All right.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And if you would like a private screening, we can make that available for you also.
TYNER: We can do that out here but if you touch my junk I am going to have you arrested. Ok.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Actually, we are going to have a supervisor here because of your statement.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Well, Tyner eventually refused a pat down, too. And never made it on his flight and he says he's now facing a $10,000 fine and a possible civil suit.
But this guy isn't the only one fighting back against those body scanners. A lot of people are saying enough is enough, even pilots.
That brings us to this morning's "A.M. Extra" John Roberts making news this morning. You actually got the TSA administrator John Pistole to admit that rules could change for pilots -- John.
JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Indeed they could. Because the TSA has come under heat by the two largest pilot unions and just late yesterday Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger who of course put the U.S. air flight down in the Hudson River rang in and say, why are we screening pilots anyways?
The two unions have said, hey we're concerned about radiation but Sully said it just doesn't make sense.
Particularly when you consider that if a pilot really wanted to commit an act of terror he or her would have the greatest weapon of terror at their fingertips and that is the aircraft.
So John Pistole saying this morning that they may be looking at some revisions; they are working with the pilots union to see what makes sense because he said they are a trusted employee and maybe they don't need to. Now, he didn't say this but the suggestion is maybe they don't need to go through the full screening that all the other passengers do -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well now, let's get back to this passenger in San Diego. I've been through that airport. And I've said that I have not wanted the body scan. And they have just taken me aside and they've done the wand. It wasn't an issue. But he recorded this whole process and it's gone viral on YouTube.
You asked John Pistole about this. What did he have to say?
ROBERTS: Well, he said that obviously people are going to have their concerns and that the TSA is trying to keep a lot of people happy but obviously a lot of people aren't. Let's listen to what he told me.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN PISTOLE, TSA ADMINISTRATOR: Obviously everybody has their own perspectives about their personal screening. And again, it gets back to the issue of what are we doing to ensure everybody else on the flight that people are being properly screened.
So if Abdul Mutallab from 12/25 had several -- look, I -- I don't want you doing a pat down on me because of my beliefs or whatever it may be, so that's something we have to balance. All trying to be sensitive to the individual's issues and concerns of privacy and things and also the -- the bottom line of ensuring that everybody gets on that flight has been properly screened.
ROBERTS: I understand that part but what about this threat though of a $10,000 fine, and a potential civil litigation, because he didn't go through the screening process?
PISTOLE: Well, there are a number of different possibilities there, the bottom line is -- if somebody does not go through proper security screening then they are not going to get on the flight.
ROBERTS: Right.
PISTOLE: So that -- that's what it comes down to.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: And it's true, you can say you don't want the body scanner, you can get the wand but apparently he wanted to take it a step further and say never mind, I don't want anything so of course he can't fly.
ROBERTS: Oh yes. And -- but the issue wasn't that he couldn't fly. I mean, it think he accepted the idea and -- and the TSA administrator there kind of ducked my question. It was the issue of being potentially subject to a $10,000 fine because he didn't want to go through the screening.
And -- and also, Kyra, what Tyner says that he was going to be subjected to, when we hear that on the tape recording as well, was more than just a wand. It's a -- it's a -- it's pat down that includes the TSA screener sliding the flat part of their palm up the inside of his leg all the way up to the groin, front and back. And that is to make sure that they get at least some sense in that area where Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab had that underwear bomb secreted, that -- that there isn't something there that's not supposed to be there.
PHILLIPS: Well, we'll definitely see what happens with regard to pilots and if indeed they're going to have to go through this. It was interesting that the head of TSA actually said that could change.
John thanks so much.
Well, some groups are planning airport protests for next Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, one of the busiest travel days of the year by the way. And they are going to opt out of scanners and forcing pat downs and probably making security lines a lot longer.
So if you are planning to opt out during your holiday travel, are you a frequent traveler who does that, well, we want to hear from you. Sound off at CNN.com/Kyra. We'll read some of your responses next hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Well, we're following lots of developments for the next hour of CNN NEWSROOM. Let's start with Carol Costello. Carol, what you got?
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kyra, we often hear, why not just let the Bush tax cuts expire, but if they're allowed to expire, how much will that mean for your bottom line? If you make $70,000 a year, how much extra will you pay in taxes? We have the lowdown for you at the top of the hour.
ROB MARCIANO, AMS METEOROLOGIST: And I'm Rob Marciano in the CNN Severe Weather Center. While some folks in the East Coast were enjoying temperatures in the 60s and 70s, this weekend it was snowing in the Midwest. We'll have that video. Plus, now the rains have moved into the east. The weather in the next hour.
JOSH LEVS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Josh Levs. Facebook's big announcement today could change the world of e-mail. Some are already dubbing it a G-mail killer. What this is all about? We'll tell you in the next hour -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: All right, thanks guys.
And a big political donor rubs elbows with the who's who of Washington. But police say he's a con and a fugitive. He's wanted for allegedly scamming millions of dollars through a phony veterans charity. We'll be talking more about this guy coming up in the next hour of CNN NEWSROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Good music.
TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, yes, yes.
PHILLIPS: Well, we forgot your move.
HARRIS: This is Gwen Stefani. Is that what this is? Hey, baby, hey, baby --
PHILLIPS: Oh, that's perfect for you.
You love attractive women that can dance.
HARRIS: Well, yes, who doesn't?
PHILLIPS: Time for "The Big Play" and that means Tony Harris.
HARRIS: You want to see some big plays.
PHILLIPS: Let's see some big plays.
HARRIS: Just a couple of big plays and then we're going to get to something that feels a little outrageous to me. I'll get your take on it.
This is the Jacksonville game. This is what you're supposed to do if you're the Bucks. You're supposed to knock this Hail Mary down. Nobody scores on a Hail Mary. No one scores -- someone just scored on a Hail Mary.
PHILLIPS: No. There are plenty of people who have scored on a Hail Mary in the past.
HARRIS: Yes. But the defensive guy for the Bucks does exactly what he's supposed to do. He's supposed to knock the ball down but he knocked it into the arms of the smallest player on the field; 5'8" tall and he walks in, Jags win, Jags win.
PHILLIPS: I think the best Hail Mary's are when they throw like, you know, all the way across the field, the receiver gets.
HARRIS: Yes, yes.
PHILLIPS: That's a real Hail Mary --
HARRIS: With the laterals and all of that kind of nonsense, right.
PHILLIPS: Exactly -- boom, boom, boom. Throw it, the clock is ticking, it's over.
HARRIS: You want one more?
PHILLIPS: Yes, sure.
HARRIS: We have another big play for you.
PHILLIPS: Show us what you've got.
HARRIS: All right. We have another big play -- this is from the Jets and the Browns game, right. And the Jets are playing really, really well.
PHILLIPS: I was listening to that in the cab.
HARRIS: This is Santonio Holmes. I think you interviewed him after he made the big catch in the Super Bowl game for the Steelers. He's playing for the Jets.
Kyra this is a pretty simply game. This is a terrific game. The Jets are playing good ball but this is a simple slant pattern. You're not supposed to score on this. This is a simple x button on Xbox; a simply y on the play station.
You know, you're going to play on Xbox, you do a little juke, and you score on Xbox but you don't score in overtime.
PHILLIPS: What is a little juke on the line?
HARRIS: that's what you do. You do it -- it's that. It's here, it's that. It's bad. It's bad. It's all of that, Kyra.
(CROSSTALK)
HARRIS: Like all of that. A little high, step a little juke. That's for Play Station. It's not in overtime in a big game in the NFL, all right.
PHILLIPS: All right. Well, juke-out much different from a blackout, which is play number three.
HARRIS: Yes. Take a look at this. If you spend $1.6 billion on a brand new stadium, it's not too much to ask that the lights stay on, is it? Is it too much to ask? Twice in this ball game, right, Giants and Cowboys, brand new stadium there in New Jersey in the Meadow Lands, the lights go out twice. The first for just a short period of time, the second time lasted for what Kyra -- five minutes. Is it too much to pay the con-ed?
Five minutes.
PHILLIPS: All right, in less than five minutes, we have to wrap up with this little kid out in Milwaukee.
He can roll off the entire roster. I love this. Let's take a listen.
(AUDIO CLIP)
HARRIS: He'll keep going.
PHILLIPS: Hold on, almost there. You can't understand a damn thing he's saying, but it sure it cute.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIPS: The Big Duke with Tony Harris.
