Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Mother of Casey Anthony Testifies; Pilot Berates Flight Crew
Aired June 23, 2011 - 14:59 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: And you have been listening to the president speaking to a number of troops there in Fort Drum, New York. Speaking about his decision, his announcement to a primetime audience last night, the fact that he will begin that drawdown by the end of this year. Ten thousand troops will be leaving Afghanistan by the end of next summer, and an additional 23,000 troops will be out of Afghanistan by the end of next summer.
But he said the job isn't finished. There will still be about 70,000 troops remaining in Afghanistan. The president there in Fort Drum, New York, wrapping up.
And welcome back here, hour two of CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Quite a busy afternoon for you and a busy day here.
I want to get to a trial that many of you have been following out of Orlando, Florida. And it's significant today. You're looking at live pictures here of Casey Anthony. She is on trial for the murder of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee. She faces the death penalty if she is convicted.
And, right now, we want to take you live because her mother, Cindy Anthony, has now taken the stand.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
CINDY ANTHONY, MOTHER OF CASEY ANTHONY: If those computer entries were made, then I made them. I was home. I know I took some hours off. During that week was Casey's birthday and my anniversary, and I did go home early a couple days.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. Now you have to work at 7:30 to 5:00 typically?
ANTHONY: My hours are whatever I make them to be. I had to be there at least from 8:30 to 5:00, and then my hours got extended within two hours after -- excuse me -- within two weeks after I started working, the hours got extended to 5:30.
So, when I signed up, it was from 8:30 to 5:00, but after I got hired, it was from 8:30 to 5:30. And I would always come a minimum of a half-hour prior to and stay as long as I needed to.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. So it's your testimony today that it's possible that you were home on that day, even though your work records reflect something differently; that's correct? (CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overruled.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is that correct?
ANTHONY: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Even though your work records suggest or established that you were working on March 21 of 2008, is it your testimony in front of this jury that you were home between 2:16 and 2:28 p.m.?
ANTHONY: It's possible. I mean...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Were you or weren't you?
ANTHONY: That day...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (OFF-MIKE) Asked and answered.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overruled.
ANTHONY: The only thing that triggers that day for me is those computer entries. It was not a traumatic day for me, like the last three years. So I can't tell you exactly what time I went home. If I had access to my work computer, I could tell you when I left that day.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you looked in the last three years to determine what time you went home on March 17 of 2008?
ANTHONY: I have not been to work since July -- July 15 of 2008. I never returned back to my employer.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do they still exist?
ANTHONY: Yes, they do.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If you wanted to, you could go and find out if in fact you left work on March 17 of 2008, even though your records reflect that you didn't?
ANTHONY: No, I don't think so.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They won't let you in the door?
ANTHONY: No, that's not -- that's not the reason. The reason is because I had a working password and I was an employee. And only I would know through my e-mails what time I left. And no one had a password to my e-mails, and I'm sure all those things have been lost by now.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're guessing?
ANTHONY: No, I'm not guessing. No, I'm not guessing.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let me ask you this. On Friday, March...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: ... allow the witness time to answer, complete their answer?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ma'am, did you complete your answer?
ANTHONY: No, I did not.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Complete your answer, ma'am.
ANTHONY: We had several passwords to get into our computer. And everything -- I had at least two log-in passwords to my computer that only I had access to. It was against policy to give your passwords to even your supervisor.
I also had a computer access -- I mean, access password to my e- mails, and, again no, one was allowed to get into my e-mails except me. And those computer passwords expire every 30 days. And without me being there to put in my old password to create a new one, no one would be able to get into my passwords.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you have knowledge as to whether or not your company backs up your e-mails?
ANTHONY: I don't know if they would still have them three years from now, because the reason I say that is because our e-mails had a memory that only lasted so long, and it depended on how much was in there if we deleted them or not.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My question was, do you have knowledge as to whether or not your former employer backed up their e-mails on a regular basis?
ANTHONY: Again, it would depend on the length of time that those e-mails were there.
One office that I worked at -- our -- our company was nationwide. We were in 40-some states. And in each state, there was many, many Gentiva locations. Ours was just one. And the capacity that each office could hold was a little bit. And, every day, we generated referrals which came as e-mails for our patients, not counting the e- mails that I would get from other employees in the office and my staff.
So there was only a capability that the computer could store those. So I do not believe that the company would still have the ones from three years ago. It would be virtually impossible to keep everybody's as a backup.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right.
You were aware of the fact that these computers searches were an issue as early as August or September of 2008, correct?
ANTHONY: No. The first time I found out about the computer searches was with Detective Melich and Detective Allen (ph) coming to my house, asking why Casey might perform it -- those searches. And I was...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: When was that?
ANTHONY: That was prior to Casey's arrest on check charges.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. So this would have been in September of 2008?
ANTHONY: Whatever date that was, yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. I take it that you did not tell them that you made those searches, correct?
ANTHONY: I did -- I did tell the law enforcement. In fact, I told you during my deposition in 2009 that I made those searches.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You told me at your deposition that you searched for chlorophyll, correct?
ANTHONY: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And you spelled chlorophyll for me.
ANTHONY: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you recall that?
ANTHONY: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you recall denying that you made any searches for how to make chloroform?
ANTHONY: I didn't look how to make chloroform. I looked up chloroform. And I believed we talked about it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you input into a Google search engine...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Excuse me. (OFF-MIKE) I would ask that the witness be allowed to complete her answer before being interrupted by the prosecutor.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ma'am, did you finish answering your question?
ANTHONY: I can't remember. If she would re-ask the question, and if she would read back what I said, then I might know if I had something else to say.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK.
Madam court reporter, read back the last question and the last portion of Ms. Anthony's answer to her.
And wait until she tells you to go ahead, Ms. Anthony.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: "Do you recall denying that you made any searches for how to make chloroform?"
Answer: "I didn't look up how to make chloroform. I looked up chloroform."
ANTHONY: Yes, I looked up chloroform, and the -- when you look up chloroform, you don't have to look up how to make it on there. It tells you what the chains are.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. You testified in the past that you looked up chlorophyll.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Correct?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's improper impeachment.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overruled.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Correct?
ANTHONY: Correct. At the same time, I looked up chloroform.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You suggested that the Google search engine asked you if you wanted to change the spelling of chlorophyll when you made this search, correct?
ANTHONY: Correct.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because you spelled chlorophyll wrong.
ANTHONY: Correct.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you input the words into the Google search engine how to make chloroform?
ANTHONY: I don't recall putting in how to make chloroform, but I did Google search chloroform, and we talked about it in my deposition.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The question is -- and it's a yes or no -- did you type in to the search bar on Google how to make chloroform?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection. This question has been asked and answered twice.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overruled.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you type those words into the search bar on Google?
ANTHONY: I don't recall typing in how to make chloroform. I recall typing in the word chloroform.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you recall denying that you searched for self-defense?
ANTHONY: Yes, I did not search for self-defense.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Household weapons?
ANTHONY: I did not search for household weapons.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Neck-breaking.
ANTHONY: I did not search for neck-breaking, but I do recall that there was a pop-up that was showing a YouTube regarding a skateboarder that was skateboarding on rails, like if you're going like a turnstile-type rail if you're going into some place and -- the skateboarder -- and I recall it saying a neck-breaking feat.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is this something that you're recalling now that you have changed your medication since July of 2009?
ANTHONY: Again, it's not...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes?
ANTHONY: No. I recalled that at the time, but you didn't ask me to -- about...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK.
ANTHONY: I answered your questions specifically at that time, but my memory is better than it was when I had my deposition in 2009.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, ma'am.
Did you -- did we cover whether or not you did a search for the word shovel?
ANTHONY: No. I wouldn't need to look up the word shovel.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. On March 17, did you look up the word inhalation?
ANTHONY: Probably.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you know?
ANTHONY: There were several searches that I did that day. I also searched regarding the injuries, too.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Alcohol?
ANTHONY: Yes. I...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Acetone?
ANTHONY: I already answered Mr. Baez to that. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Peroxide?
ANTHONY: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hydrogen peroxide?
ANTHONY: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is this something that you have recalled since July of 2009, since your medication has been changed?
ANTHONY: No. I recall doing that because of the -- because of the e-mail that I got regarding the effects if a child ingested hand sanitizer because of the alcohol content. That's why I looked up alcohol and I looked up those items, because it triggered me to look up other household contents that we use near Caylee. We painted her nails. I used acetone near her.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What search engine do you use?
ANTHONY: Whatever is on the computer, whether it's Google or Yahoo!.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What browser?
ANTHONY: I'm not even sure what you're referring to.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. When you turn that computer on, which profile do you use?
ANTHONY: The computer -- our home computer, the desktop, we left on pretty much 100 percent of the time. It was rarely shut down. So, usually, if I had to go on, we just -- it was already on. All we had to do is just refresh it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. So are you testifying you don't know which profile you used?
ANTHONY: Profile regarding?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There are only two profiles on your computer. Do you know that?
ANTHONY: Are you talking about my laptop or the desktop?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, we're talking exclusively about the desktop.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There's a user profile and there's a Casey profile. There's usually an icon when you turn it on, and you pick one. Do you recall that? ANTHONY: I don't recall having to do that on my desktop. On my -- my laptop, yes, there was two.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right. So, on the desktop, you would not have entered a password, correct?
ANTHONY: No. I -- we did not have a password on our desktop.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. Did you do searches for making weapons out of household products?
ANTHONY: No.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Chloroform habits?
ANTHONY: Chloroform habit?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (OFF-MIKE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) not in evidence.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There's already been testimony about this, Your Honor.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overruled.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Chloroform habit?
ANTHONY: I have never heard that come up before, no.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Chloro and the number two, was that you?
ANTHONY: Chloro two?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mm-hmm.
ANTHONY: I don't know. I know there's chlorophyll one and two.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK.
Were you on druglibrary.org?
ANTHONY: Oh, all the time.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Instructables.com?
ANTHONY: Don't know.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Scispot.com/chloroform (ph)?
ANTHONY: I don't know if it came up that way.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Were you on that Web site 84 times?
ANTHONY: I was on it several times.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Were you on that Web site 84 times?
ANTHONY: I don't know. I don't know. They need to look up how many times I was on the chlorophyll Web site and compare it to the chloroform Web site.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you do 84 searches for the effects of chlorophyll on your animals?
ANTHONY: I didn't do 84 searches of anything, but I don't know what my computer does while it's running.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. In March of 2008, you did not have a MySpace account, correct?
ANTHONY: No, I did not.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you have Facebook?
ANTHONY: No, I did not.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If I may show and publish state's 80 for identification, Your Honor.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You may.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can you see that?
ANTHONY: Yes, ma'am.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Where's this stain that was in the car when you purchased it in 2000?
ANTHONY: The stain was somewhere up in here.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm sorry. Let me -- let me clear that, because I think I took it away too fast.
Tell us again.
ANTHONY: The stain was up in the top section.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Near the letter B?
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Closer to the letter B than the letter A in the dryer sheet in the back?
ANTHONY: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have no other questions of Mrs. Anthony.
Thank you, Your Honor.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Redirect? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mrs. Anthony, I got a little confused. I wanted to make sure. The password protection was on your work computer, correct?
ANTHONY: I had password protection on my work computer, but not at home.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But as far as your desktop at home, there's no password for that?
ANTHONY: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And would you ever go on the computer after Casey would use it?
ANTHONY: The computer was left on all the time, so a lot of times, I would come home. Casey would be on the computer, and I would ask her if I could get on for a few minutes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And all this stuff about chlorophyll and chloroform, you had told the prosecutors about that back in 2009, did you not?
ANTHONY: Yes, I did.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And this is nothing new?
ANTHONY: No, it's not.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (OFF-MIKE) leading (OFF-MIKE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is this anything new?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sustained as to leading. Rephrase your question.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is this testimony anything new?
ANTHONY: No, sir. I did tell the detectives, and I did tell the state's attorneys office about the searches, and they knew that I had searched for chlorophyll as well.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No further questions.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any additional questions?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (OFF-MIKE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: May the witness stand down?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, ma'am. You may stand down.
(END OF LIVE COVERAGE) BALDWIN: So you have been listening to Cindy Anthony, mother of Casey Anthony, facing a murder charge there, as she's walking away from the witness box in this courtroom, back and forth, both with prosecution and defense there, essentially very much so honing in on this computer.
She had a work computer at her home, where her daughter Casey lived and, of course, little Caylee as well, questioning about search terms and Google, chloroform, chlorophyll, self-defense, household weapons, hydrogen peroxide, back and forth there with Cindy Anthony, as they are trying to determine if in fact perhaps that might have been Cindy or Casey searching for those items.
Many, many questions abound with regard to what happened to that 2-year-old little girl, Caylee Anthony.
CNN NEWSROOM will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: All right. Welcome back, everyone.
I want to pick up this story. A group of flight attendants may file a lawsuit over a pilot's rant about his co-workers. I played this piece of sound for you yesterday. The replay is coming.
But suffice it to say several air traffic controllers and crews on other planes overheard this pilot's homophobic, sexist rant on an open mike in the cockpit. So now the Southwest flight attendants' union says it might be filing a workplace discrimination suit. The pilot apologized, was disciplined.
But I want you to listen. If you haven't heard it, listen with me. If you have, listen to it again here. We have believed out a couple of words, but you can still hear why his comments were considered so offensive.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, but I had Tucson to Indy all four week. And Chicago crews -- 11 out of 12 -- there's 12 flight attendants, individuals, never the same flight attendant twice, 11 (EXPLETIVE DELETED) over the top (EXPLETIVE DELETED) homosexuals and a granny, 11.
I mean, think of the odds of that. I thought I was in Chicago, which was party land.
After that, it was just a continuous stream of gays and grannies and grandes. Oh, I don't give a (EXPLETIVE DELETED). I hate 100 percent of their (EXPLETIVE DELETED). So, six months, I went to the bar three times, in six months, three times, once with the granny and the (EXPLETIVE DELETED), and I wish I hadn't gone -- at the very end with two girls, one of them that was part doable, but we ended up going to the bar and then to the crew at St. Louis. And all these two women wanted to do was, one wanted to berate her sister, and the other wanted to (EXPLETIVE DELETED) about her husband, literally, for three hours, me and the F.O. When that was done, 2:30, got back to my room, I'm like why the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) did I stay up?"
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. Whoever is transmitting, you better what you're saying there.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) You know what I mean? I still wouldn't want anyone to know if I had banged them. So, I mean it was a complete disaster for six months. Now I'm back in Houston, which is easily where one of the ugliest bases. I mean, it's all these (EXPLETIVE DELETED) old dudes and grannies, and there's like maybe a handful of cute chicks.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, someone's got a stuck mike and telling us all about their endeavors. We don't need to hear that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Houston, SkyWest 6285, we're 195230, and that was not us.
(LAUGHTER)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: SkyWest 6285, Houston Center, roger. Climb and maintain flight level 360.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Three-six-zero SkyWest 6285. And they wonder why airline pilots have a bad reputation.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) 28, contact Ft. Worth Center now 133.1.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Number 7 Hotel Bravo (INAUDIBLE) maintain at level 240.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Two-four-zero (INAUDIBLE) Hotel Bravo.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it wasn't us either.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roger. I didn't think that was you.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
BALDWIN: Southwest vice president Chuck Magill is apologizing about that incident. He says the airline has taken steps to correct the situation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHUCK MAGILL, VICE PRESIDENT OF FLIGHT OPERATIONS, SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: What he said is offensive and inconsistent with the professional behavior and overall respect we require from all employees. We have disciplined him. We have suspended him. And he's taken additional diversity and inclusion training to reinforce the company's expectation that he show respect and treat all with dignity.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: That pilot was suspended without pay. He is now back on duty. We do not know what kind of reception he's getting from his co-workers, though, especially in that Houston base.
Now, flight attendants here none too pleased that Southwest suspended this pilot without pay and that the same pilot back on the job. They are considering a lawsuit against the airline for workplace discrimination.
And I have the head of the Transportation Workers Union, which represents, by the way, Southwest's 9,400 flight attendants. This is Thom McDaniel, good enough to join me.
Tom, thanks so much for coming on.
Before we talk about this possible lawsuit here, can I just get your quick reaction to that -- that rant?
THOM MCDANIEL, PRESIDENT, TRANSPORTATION WORKERS UNION 556: Well, I was really disappointed that my co-workers were being talked about in that way. And I was certainly disappointed that that was coming from one of our pilots, who we depend on every day to keep us safe.
BALDWIN: Thom, your union is considering a lawsuit. Can you define considering for me?
MCDANIEL: Well, the statement that we have made is that we're investigating a possible EEOC complaint, but what we have also said is that we feel like a better -- this would be a better opportunity for our union, our entire company to sit down with our company and work through this the way that we have always been able to and make sure that every employee at Southwest Airlines is respected and accepted for the incredible job that we do every day.
We would much rather sit down with our company and make sure that this is resolved and it never happens again.
BALDWIN: OK. Well, let's talk about some sort of resolution. We know that Southwest, they have apologized. They are calling this an isolated incident. The pilot went through sensitivity training. He's now back.
That may or may not be good enough for you. I'm hearing it may not be. What do you want to have happen here?
MCDANIEL: Well, with this particular pilot, obviously, the company has done what we feel is appropriate, and we would certainly never even pretend that this is every pilot.
Most of our pilots are very professional, and they are some of the best workers that I know. But we want to make -- we know this doesn't happen with every pilot, but we do want to make sure that every time that it does happen, that it's addressed appropriately, and, like I said, that our employees can go to work and they can feel valued for the quality of their work and not any negative perceptions that people might have about them.
BALDWIN: Thom, should the pilot be flying?
MCDANIEL: That's not a decision for me to make.
My -- my responsibility is to make sure that every employee at Southwest Airlines feels valued. I hope that we will be able to sit down with the company and not sweep this kind of discrimination under the rug, but to make sure that we can address it, so that no employee has to go to work and be subjected to those kinds of attitudes.
BALDWIN: I know you won't answer then that question specifically, but you do represent this union and, as we mentioned, several thousand of these flight attendants, specifically with Southwest. How have they been reacting to this piece of sound?
MCDANIEL: Well, our flight attendants have -- have had a reaction, you know, that they are very hurt and they are very angry. I think they are angry on a couple of levels. They are angry that that kind of language could be used and that now that our company is being subjected to this kind of scrutiny.
And I think that they would also like to see the company step up and be more proactive and just make sure that we're making sure that things like this don't happen again. We really -- we don't believe in going to court every time we have some kind of a dispute. We have talked a lot about this issue, but I think the most important talking is not going to be about it, but to each other about how to make sure it doesn't happen again.
BALDWIN: OK. Thom McDaniel, let us know if you do finally decide to file suit. We would certainly like to report on that.
Thom, thank you.
MCDANIEL: Thank you.
BALDWIN: It is a busy afternoon here on several fronts, folks, talking oil, war, debt.
Let's just say the president, he's getting it from all sides now. So what is his secretary of state talking about when she uses the phrase diplomatic surge in Afghanistan?
We're going to check in with Jill Dougherty there at the State Department right after this quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: All right, I want to pick up where I left off. Back to the day today. We need to talk about oil, war, and debt, and the president is really getting it you will it from all sides here. Right now Republicans are bailing on those meetings with the vice president, Joe Biden. The sessions they have been working hard to reduce the deficit. Keep in mind here the clock is ticking on when they have to make a call on raising the debt ceiling. That deadline is August 2nd. Today, top Republicans, you have Eric Cantor and Jon Kyl, they dropped out of the talks. They say the Democrat calls for more stimulus measures simply won't pass through Congress.
And then there's this, that announcement that the administration will release 30 million barrels from the strategic oil reserve. That is stoking the debate on America's energy policy this afternoon. Add to that the president's plan that he announced last night to bring 10,000 troops home by the end of this year from Afghanistan.
Now his defense secretary, also his Joint Chiefs chair, even his top commander on the ground there, David Petraeus who by the way is about to be confirmed really any time now, this afternoon the head of the CIA, they have all shared concerns about the president's timetable for a drawdown.
And then there are the words of his secretary of state who says, like it or not, we are negotiating with the Taliban. And that is where I want to spring in our foreign affairs correspondent Jill Dougherty at the state department. And Jill, the president just kicked off, you know, let's call it the sales job here on the troop drawdown today. We saw him, you know, not a half hour ago there in New York at Ft. Drum. But this morning secretary of state Hillary Clinton testified on Capitol Hill on Afghanistan. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: I do hope that everybody in the Congress and the press and the public understands that you don't -- you don't end wars by talking only to people whom you agree or who are, you know, good actors. You end wars by, unfortunately, but the fact is talking with people whose interests and values are often very much opposite of yours.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: So Jill, she is pushing the idea of the so-called diplomatic surge in Afghanistan. Can you explain that a little further?
JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I mean, this strategy has been out there for a while, but it's really picking up, and why? Well, Hillary Clinton at this hearing in the Senate today said that basically the Taliban didn't want to talk with them until they started getting hit by U.S. and coalition forces. And now that they are making progress they are ready to talk.
So the idea is Al Qaeda and the Taliban are different, and what they are trying to do is split them by bringing over the Taliban who might be reconcilable, as they say. It's very early. It's tentative. Nobody knows where it's going but that is the theory. But, Brooke, it's important to point out that there are some red lines that Secretary Clinton was talking about. BALDWIN: Let me also point out when we heard from the president about half an hour ago speaking to the troops at Ft. Drum, he mentioned the Taliban taking fight to them, but he says the Taliban is more interested in a political settlement. Again, we're hearing these phrases. But with regard to Secretary Clinton, why is she focusing so much on this with regard to the Taliban and reconciliation?
DOUGHERTY: You know, they believe really -- this administration believes that you can't win it just with the military, that you're going to have to bring that society together one way or another.
And Al Qaeda, they would say want to -- let's say take over the world. The Taliban are from Afghanistan. They are interested in certain parts of Afghanistan, but they are part of the fabric of society, whether anybody likes it or not. So they need to talk to them in some fashion or another.
But, you know, the red lines that just mentioned are crucial because the first one would be they have to renounce violence, second one, they have to renounce Al Qaeda, and the third is they have to accept the afghan constitution, and that means women's rights. So there's a big question. Would the Taliban actually go for that?
BALDWIN: With regard to that third line and your point about women's rights. We know the Taliban is extremely repressive. Do we really expect they are going to be a little better in that regard?
DOUGHERTY: You know, nobody really knows, and, in fact, I was looking carefully at some of the comments by the secretary today, and she said, you know, there is a theory, and she seems to agree with it, that sometimes when you're locked in a situation that's not going anyplace, and the Taliban are getting hit, then they might be willing to say they are ready for talks but actually it's just kind of a temporizing thing, and it could be a prelude to going back to fighting.
So I think there's a lot of skepticism, but ultimately they feel that you just have to have this political reconciliation. Otherwise it's simply not -- the conflict won't come to an end.
BALDWIN: Well, we will see, won't we? We'll see. Jill Dougherty at the State Department. Jill, appreciate it.
And he led a city during one of the worst national disasters the nation has ever faced. Now former New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin is giving folks a behind-the-scenes look at the entire fiasco as it played out in a new no-holds-barred book. Mr. Nagin joining me live from New Orleans, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: It has been one month since the tornado ripped through Joplin, Missouri, and the number of people killed in that natural disaster sits at 156 after a woman injured in the tornado last month has now passed away. And according to the National Weather Service, the tornado that hit Joplin was the single most deadly tornado in 60 years.
And now to this. Really, the pictures tell the story. Who can forget these images? People stranded on rooftops, water up to the rafters, pleading for rescue. Can you believe it? It's been just about six years since Hurricane Katrina caused dozens of breaches and levees protecting New Orleans, flooding 80 percent of that city and changing New Orleans for years to come, if not forever.
Ray Nagin served as New Orleans mayor during hurricane Katrina, and he's just written a memoir about that time in New Orleans. Here's some pictures of him signing copies, four and a half hours sat there signing copies of this new book. It's called "Katrina Secrets -- Storms after the Storm." And it is a behind-the-scenes perspective of what really happened in New Orleans in the days leading up to the storm and afterwards that devastated his city.
Nagin published the book himself so there are no filters. There are no holds barred. Here he is, former mayor Ray Nagin joining me from New Orleans. Good to see you. Got the book, read the book. Let's just begin with this. I want you to just give yourself a grade, Mr. Mayor, of how you handled Katrina. What would you give yourself?
RAY NAGIN, (D) FORMER NEW ORLEANS MAYOR: Well, you know, that's tough to do, Brooke. It was a catastrophic event. The largest natural and manmade disaster ever, basically coming through that, I did some things that were well done, and I also made a few mistakes. I've talked about that a lot, as far as whether I should have called the evacuation -- mandatory evacuation a little bit earlier but that's tough to do.
BALDWIN: But if you had to, and I'm putting you on the spot because you can here, sir, A, B, C, D, F? What would you pick?
NAGIN: Probably a C or C+.
BALDWIN: There have been a lot of comparisons and especially during that time, you and Rudy Giuliani and 9/11, but the big, big difference here is that you weren't just the leader, the mayor of the city in crisis, many homes underwater, half your police department, their homes were underwater. You had just the clothes off your back.
NAGIN: Yes.
BALDWIN: But the criticism, as a leader, you know, you didn't just stumble off the blocks. You fumbled the ball. Do you agree, and then how do you respond to that?
NAGIN: You know, I don't necessarily agree. I don't think any mayor in our history has gone through what we have gone through, you know. With all due respect to Mr. Giuliani, his disaster was confined to a very small area. This was a total devastation of almost an entire city with 80 percent of it underwater. The fumbles that people talk about are mainly people that weren't here, and that's what I try and do with the book. I take you behind the scenes so you can understand fully how complex and daunting this task was. BALDWIN: Well, staying with football analogy here and the fumble. A lot of people I know and I've talked to people in New Orleans since then who say why did he still hold that football game in the superdome the Friday before the storm hit that Sunday night and Monday night? Do you regret making that call?
NAGIN: No, I don't. If you go back to when Katrina -- she was a very deceptive storm. It wasn't until a Friday night before she hit on Sunday that there was real clarify that she was coming to New Orleans. I got a call from Max Mayfield, the head of the hurricane center, who said, man, look, in my professional opinion this is headed for New Orleans and that's when we moved to mandatory evacuation.
BALDWIN: I want to bring in Chad Myers, weather man here, who very much so was here during Katrina. Jump in, sir.
CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Mr. Mayor, with all due respect, this was a category five 24 hours before it hit your city. How did people not get out? How did they not get the word? Better yet, let's not Monday morning quarterback, when this happens again to a different city in America, how do we fix it so people really do leave?
NAGIN: Well, you say that it was a category five, and that's true, but she was dancing around. She only got pointed towards New Orleans 24 hours out. It takes this region about 72 hours to effectively evacuate.
Now the issue of other cities. I'm really concerned about that. We're starting to see more natural disasters. As a matter of fact, I've been tracking them, and there's been over 400 declared major disasters since hurricane Katrina, and they are getting more intense, and they are being linked -- natural disasters with a manmade disaster and nothing has really changed from the laws that govern our nation's response so I'm really concerned.
BALDWIN: I want to get back to the lessons learned and Chad Myers, thank you very much. I do want to talk about -- there were times, Mr. Nagin, when you spoke, and I'm quoting you, you moved away from the script, like this moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NAGIN: It's time for us to rebuild a New Orleans, the one that should be a chocolate New Orleans. And I don't care what people are saying up town or wherever they are, this city will be chocolate at the end of the day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: I'm going to ask, Mayor Nagin, do you feel the emotions stifled out the message and what he's doing now and the biggest lesson he's learned since the storm. Breaking news on two men charged in planning attack on a Seattle military processing center. All of that and more coming up. Stay here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BALDWIN: Breaking news here into CNN. Two men charged with terrorism and firearms in the Seattle area. CNN's Jeanne Meserve working the story for me and joining it now. Jeanne, who are you learning?
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brooke, they were arrested late last night according to the department of justice. Joseph Anthony Davis of Seattle, Washington, and Frederick Domingue, 32 of Los Angeles, had machine guns and intended to use these in order to attack the military entrance processing station in Seattle.
According to the Department of Justice, law enforcement became aware of these people when someone who had been approached to help purchase firearms went to law enforcement and told them what was up. They then worked with law enforcement. We're told, according to this press release from the department of justice, that they do have them captured on audio and videotape, and that they had been monitoring these individuals for some time.
They say there was no threat to the public because they had made the machine guns which these men were allegedly purchasing inoperable. So they would pose absolutely no risk to the public. They said that initially this pair of men allegedly planned an attack on a different military facility, joint base Lewis in Washington state, but later they changed their targets.
Initially they wanted to use, according to this, both grenades and machine guns, but in the attack that was allegedly attacked on this entrance processing station in Seattle they were going to use the machine guns, machine guns which had been rendered inoperable. Brooke?
BALDWIN: Jeanne Meserve, thanks so much for the update.
Now back to my conversation with former New Orleans Mayor Ray Ngin. He's here talking about his book, "Katrina Secrets - Storms after the Storm." He's joining me back live in New Orleans.
Mayor, let's pick up with the federal government. You talk a lot about FEMA and talk a lot about the federal government, very much slow to respond, and you specifically talk about the President Bush speech, we all remember, washing him in Jackson Square. You write about the valuable lights and the generators and write specifically that "Disney-like magic left almost as quick as it arrived," and your point here, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the White House was just very out of touch.
NAGIN: Well, out of touch and basically in a reactive mode. They were spinning and that whole scene in my humble opinion, was really back, but we weren't. There were no lights. There still was water in many parts of the city. And it just points to how out of touch, your words, the administration was.
BALDWIN: Are you concerned at all going forward, Mr. Nagin, that people may not want to work with you down the line? NAGIN: I don't think that. The main reason for my book is to give people an insider's perspective on what happened.
BALDWIN: Do you think at all your emotions maybe drown out the message?
NAGIN: Well, that could be, but it was an emotional time. The chocolate speech was in response to some pretty bold calls to change the footprint of the city and changes the social makeup of the city. I rejected that. As far as the Mexican workers, that speech was totally turned around, because I was talking about we needed workers to come in and needed to get comfortable that they may not look exactly like us.
BALDWIN: But you were leading the city, the mayor. Looking back at some of the things you said, do you regret them?
NAGIN: I regret they hurt some people. But some of the circumstances dictated I make bold statements to bust through the clutter. There was a lot of media attention, and it was in my opinion, part of my responsibility to talk to the diaspora.
BALDWIN: Quick yes or no, if Katrina were to happen again in New Orleans, would you city be ready?
NAGIN: I think the city is definitely ready. Evacuation systems have been tested. Before I left office, we had a successful evacuation where we got everything out once again.
BALDWIN: Heaven forbid, it will never happen again. Ray Nagin, former may mayor of New Orleans, thank you very much for coming on.
NAGIN: Thank you so much. Create space, you can get a download on the book also.
BALDWIN: He was on the lam for 16 years. Now one of the most ruthless mobsters ever is in FBI custody. Coming up at the top of the hour I'll speak with one of the special agents behind this -- we'll call it a creative capture of James "Whitey" Bulger. Back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: Let's go to Washington, check in with Wolf Blitzer for what's happening on the CNN Political Ticker this hour. Wolf, what do you have?
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": A lot of stuff happening, but a major, major development here in Washington. You know, they've been negotiating for some time, the vice president Joe Biden, with the top congressional leadership, some way to increase the debt ceiling so the United States doesn't undermine its creditworthiness around the world. The negotiations basically collapsed today.
Today the Republicans, Eric Cantor and Jon Kyl, two of the top Republican leaders in the house and Senate, they were negotiating with the Democrats and with Vice President Biden. They came out and said, you know what, it's over until the White House accepts the fundamental fact there are not going to be any tax increases whatsoever, even tax increases on millionaires and billionaires, as the White House likes to say.
Cantor says -- said in a statement "There is not support in the House for a tax increase. I don't believe now is time to raise taxes. Regardless of the progress that has been made," he said, "the tax issue must be resolved before discussions can continue."
It's basically for the Republicans a poison pill. In other words, they want from the White House and from the Democrats a hard and fast commitment there would be absolutely no tax increases, revenue increases as they say, in order to try to reduce the deficit, to reduce the national debt.
The White House and the Democrats want to increase taxes action as you know, on at least the very wealthy. What Cantor says, the president now has to intervene in order to save these negotiations. We'll see if he does.
Another issue we're getting more reaction, not just from Republican and Democrats, but some of the Republican candidates to the president's address to the nation last night on the Afghan troop withdrawal. Jon Huntsman saying he wants more speedy action. He wants to get out of Afghanistan a little more quickly. He says we have a generational opportunity to reset our position in the world in a way that makes sense for our security as well as our budget, hundreds of billions of dollars.
Romney, though, another Republican, a frontrunner for the nomination, he says you've got to be careful. He's taking more of a hard line. We want all our troops -- we want our troops to come home as soon as possible, but we shouldn't adhere to an arbitrary timetable on the withdrawal of troops. This must be done from the military strategic point of view, not from some political agenda. So some strong words from Romney.
By the way, later today in "The Situation Room," Brooke, I'll be speaking with the president's deputy national security adviser Dennis McDonough to explain some of the questions, namely one question, how much more will this cost? And we'll speak to Mike Roger, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee as well.
BALDWIN: Wolf Blizter, you have a busy show coming up. We've got a busy next hour. Folks, we're back in two. Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
