Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Report Lays out Continuing al Qaeda Threat; Congressman Compares 9/11 to Burning of Reichstag; Toxicology Reports in for Chris Benoit, Family

Aired July 17, 2007 - 19:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GLENN BECK, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, a new intelligence report says al Qaeda is now a direct threat to the U.S.

FRANCES TOWNSEND, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR: Al Qaeda will continue to attempt visually dramatic mass casualty attacks in the homeland.

BECK: How did this happen? And can al Qaeda be stopped?

Plus, the case of the imprisoned border agents goes to the Senate. Can a possible pardon be in the works for Ramos and Compean?

And I`ll talk to a guy who`s raising money for charity by counting to a million.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fifty thousand...

BECK: It is just a matter of time before this guy loses his mind.

All this and more, tonight.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BECK: Well, hello, America.

Earlier today, the National Intelligence Estimate was released. It is the most authoritative judgment of the terrorist threats to America by 16 different spy agencies in the U.S. government. And it reads like the greatest hits collection of stuff we`ve been telling you on this program for months. So here`s the point tonight.

Al Qaeda -- surprise -- is back, and they`re stronger and more dangerous than ever before. The threats to American safety lie not only in Iraq and Iran, but across the entire Middle East, and here`s how we got there.

Let`s take a look at the press conference today when the report was released.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOWNSEND: We are facing a persistent terrorist enemy led by al Qaeda that remains driven and intent on attacking the homeland and that continues to adapt and improve its capabilities.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Gee, you think so? The Middle East is overflowing with terrorists just waiting for an opportunity to strike America, and our enemy No. 1 is obviously still al Qaeda, especially their revitalized faction now in Iraq.

Imagine if we cut and run and leave Iraq in the state that it`s in today. Do you really think Osama bin Laden and his Iraqi henchmen are going to get stronger or weaker?

Bin Laden himself has told us a year ago that the main battle in this war that he calls World War III will take place in Iraq, so how much easier do we all want to make it for al Qaeda to launch their attacks against us?

The intelligence estimate goes on to say that, with a destabilized Iraq, the terror factions in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia would also have a chance to grow and prosper.

Think of it like this. When Burger King, if it closes down in the neighborhood, the McDonald`s makes a lot more money because there`s no competition. Without America competing for the sanity and safety of the Middle East, the terrorist threat will spread like a cancer, and those cancer cells are all throughout the region.

Remember, the majority of 9/11 hijackers, they weren`t from Iran, they weren`t from Iraq. They were from Saudi Arabia. Our reference in the Middle East should be strategic, but also a little more comprehensive. Hello, where is Saudi Arabia?

And then there`s Iran, the proverbial head of the snake that`s causing the problems in the Middle East right now. According to "The New York Sun`s" story on today`s report, al Qaeda has been treating Iran like a conference room at the Ramada, using it to regularly hold their senior leadership council meetings. I don`t know if they have name tags printed up or what.

Whether you listen to me or today`s report, it is not "if" we need to deal with Iran. It is only a matter of when.

So tonight, here`s what you need to know. Our war on terror, I am sorry to say, is not nearing its end. Gang, this is only the beginning, and we need to marshal all of our strength. We need to stop listening to the clowns in Washington. Dig deep for the courage and conviction to do the hard work that lies ahead so our kids don`t have to.

This is like winning this war in Iraq. We as a nation can do anything that we set our minds to. Why? Because we`re Americans. We`re winners. Because we`re on the side of what is right and what is just. It`s not going to be easy. The simple truth remains that the right thing and the easy thing are rarely one and the same.

I`m joined now by Steve Emerson. He is the executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism and author of "Jihad Incorporated". And Michael Scheuer, the former head of the CIA search for bin Laden.

Mike, let me start with you. Correct me if I`m wrong: it doesn`t seem like we`re better off than we were six years ago.

MIKE SCHEUER, FORMER CIA OPERATIVE: No, in fact, the NIE today says we`re worse off. We`re facing the same al Qaeda threat in the form of the group surrounding Osama bin Laden, and it talks very clearly about a second tier of threat, Mr. Beck, that -- that`s arising from people who have been inspired or instigated by bin Laden`s words and al Qaeda`s deeds.

BECK: OK. Does this give you any indication, Mike, in this report that, you know, what some people have been saying, "Oh, my gosh, we`re making terrorists. We`re growing these terrorists." Any indication that that is true?

SCHEUER: No, the one failing of the report is that there is no -- there`s no indication in the report of what the motivation of the enemy is, and I think that`s a sorely lacking item for the American people.

BECK: Steve, what jumped out at you in this -- in this report?

STEVE EMERSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INVESTIGATIVE PROJECT ON TERRORISM: What jumped out at me was actually the absence of specifics. There were a lot of generalities, and I guess there was a major letdown, considering the advance articles about what was going to be in it. There really was nothing there.

The reality was that the most shocking conclusion was the absence of specific connections to Saudi Arabia, its support of Wahhabism, its support of the Muslim Brotherhood and engendering radicalization; and the danger of American-based networks radicalizing their own community members here.

BECK: So what are we -- why are we not talking about Saudi Arabia? I mean, that just kills me. I asked that on the radio program today of Rudy Giuliani. Why are we not talking about Saudi Arabia?

EMERSON: There`s a good reason. They`re sitting on 300 million barrels of reserves, and they`ve got $200 billion of T-bills. And that`s really the only reason.

And we should be talking about it, absolutely. It`s a major financial spigot. It`s a major religious spigot of legitimization of radical rhetoric against Americans, Christians, Jews. And they should be ostracized, and de-legitimized and thoroughly criticized, and we fail to do that.

BECK: OK, Michael, there was something -- there was a mention in the report about Hezbollah and how Hezbollah is going to attack us here in the -- you know, in the coming years if we attack Iran or if we continue to act in the way we do. I mean, does it -- do you think it really matters on what we do over there?

SCHEUER: I think it does, because Iran and Hezbollah are not irrational actors. They know we have their home address. The problem for America is if we stick our nose -- put a stick in the beehive, if you will.

Our immigration and border control have been so bad for so long that we know al Qaeda is -- or Hezbollah is very active in the United States and could really do us some damage. But they`re not going to take the initiative, because they don`t want to get pounded by our military.

BECK: Well, you know, Steve, I mean, what Michael just said is so true, and I don`t think most people even understand it. I saw a shocking photo about a year ago, and it said we had no -- we have no army but Hezbollah. And it was people in full burkas, and they were -- they were holding the paper up, and I said, "So, what`s so shocking about this?"

And they said, "Glenn, this is a picture from Dearborn, Michigan." I mean, they are here and they`re active.

EMERSON: They`re absolutely here, Glenn. They`re active from Hezbollah, from Hamas, from Islamic Jihad. From every single member -- even al Qaeda. I mean, they still support -- they are still supporters of al Qaeda in the United States.

And the fact is I don`t -- I disagree with your guest. I don`t believe that they need to express the motivation. The motivation is they hate us for who we are. And no matter what we do, I don`t care if we`re out of the Middle East, I don`t care if Israel ceases to exist, they will hate us and continue to attack us no matter what.

BECK: Well, you know, the thing I think of, Michael, is, you know, they`re having a little slumber party in the Capitol today to try to convince us to get out of the Middle East, or at least redeploy -- we would redeploy to Saudi Arabia. We would redeploy to Kuwait. They`re not going to stop there.

That could make things even worse, and it would be seen as a -- as a victory. Do you really think that they would stop if we -- I mean, what behavior is it that we could possibly change that would stop them when they`re looking for a global caliphate?

SCHEUER: Well, I think a global caliphate is kind of the last refuge of the neoconservatives after they`ve been wrong about anything else. There`s no chance of a caliphate in our world any more than there is of all Christians turning the other cheek, sir.

BECK: I couldn`t disagree with you more, Michael. I hope -- I hope you`re right. I hope you`re right.

SCHEUER: Yes. I think really, Glenn, that the problem we have is -- is the motivation is very important. They don`t hate us for who we are. They don`t like who we are.

But why they`re attacking us is because we support governments like the Saudis, like the Egyptians, because we`re on the Arabian Peninsula.

Islam is a very diverse civilization, and the only reason bin Laden has been able to generate any unity is because Muslims, extremists and whiskey drinkers running the spectrum, hate U.S. foreign policy.

BECK: Steve, last word here.

EMERSON: I`m sorry. With all due respect, that`s a lot of malarkey. They may hate U.S. foreign policy. They hate the United States. They hate secularism. They hate the separation of church and state. They hate our values, and nothing will stop them, other than to see our obliteration.

Whether in fact that`s a possibility or not, they believe it is, and that`s the only thing that`s motivating them.

SCHEUER: That`s a very silly statement, and it`s dangerous because.

EMERSON: It`s not a silly statement, Michael. I mean, come on, Michael. You know as well -- you have been under...

SCHEUER: Only an uneducated person would make a statement like that.

EMERSON: I`m sorry to be uneducated.

SCHEUER: I`m sorry you are too, sir.

EMERSON: I`m sorry. You`re the most educated person in the world, yet you know nothing.

BECK: Wow. Here we go. See, we just wanted to bring a little peace to the world, and the whole thing starts crashing down on our heads.

Steve, Michael, I respect both of you and your opinions, and I thank you very much for being on the program tonight.

Toxicology results are now in, in that murder-suicide involving wrestler Chris Benoit. We`ll have the latest on this tragedy.

Plus, Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison`s controversial comments comparing 9/11 to the burning of the Reichstag building in Nazi Germany. Oh, might be just a tad irresponsible as far as analogies go. But its impact may do far more damage.

And the Senate hears the case of imprisoned border guard agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. Will justice finally be served? Lou Dobbs will join me, and we`ll try to hold back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: The investigation into the tragic murder-suicide of pro wrestler Chris Benoit and his family continues to unfold. Today, toxicology reports have revealed that he was on steroids, and other drugs were also involved. Details in a bit.

But, first, I want to spend a minute here with Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison. He was speaking to a group of atheists recently, which is a party I`d like to attend, when he apparently decided to spice things up a bit by comparing September 11 to the burning of the Reichstag building in Nazi Germany.

Quoting, "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the communists for it and put the leader of that country, Hitler, in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted. The fact, is I`m not saying September 11 was a U.S. plan or anything like that. You know, that`s how they you in the nut-ball box," end quote.

Let me translate that for you. Congressman Ellison is saying that the Bush administration had anything to do with 9/11. He`s not saying that, but he`s not not saying that either.

While I believe you not only have the right but the responsibility to be critical of our government, there is a limit. In Mr. Ellison`s case, that limit became clear the day he was elected the first Muslim in Congress. With polls showing that only 40 percent of U.S. Muslims believe that Arabs were really behind 9/11, it`s absolutely irresponsible for someone in his position to even remotely insinuate that the government had any role in the attacks. And this is where the media has gotten this story wrong.

It`s because of who he is and who he represents. Congressman Ellison`s words carry far greater importance than people like Rosie O`Donnell or Charlie Sheen or anybody else who thinks the government might have been involved. He -- and maybe he alone at this time -- has the power to unite or divide, and in this case, unfortunately, I believe he`s taken the wrong path.

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, he is a former U.S. Navy lieutenant commander and the chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy.

Zuhdi, we contacted Congressman Ellison and asked him to be on part of the program, but he said he has already responded to this in a -- in a remark to the "Star Tribune". He said, quote, "Unfortunately, some have tried to misconstrue my remarks. Obviously, Osama bin Laden and the hijackers who carried out the murderous events are responsible for 9/11. The question is how do we respond to this tragedy? With fear and rage, or with courage and reason? I`m for courage and reason."

Well, so am I. What is your problem with this, Zuhdi?

ZUHDI JASSER, CHAIRMAN, AMERICAN ISLAMIC FORUM FOR DEMOCRACY: Well, my problem is, you know, here you have a congressman -- even at the time he was just congressman-elect, was going to the Imam Federation of America, giving speeches about Muslim leadership. He then went to Dearborn, Michigan, and spoke to the Muslim-American Society and the Islamic Circle of North America, organizations with direct connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Wahhabi interests and Deobandi interests.

And, yet, he is not somebody who doesn`t -- who is not shy about his faith. He wears his Islamic identity on his sleeve and has rushed to Islamist organizations to speak to them, and actually was funded to -- by some private donors who are leadership of CAIR.

So here you have somebody who`s stepping forward. Just last week, actually, three days after he made that statement, he spoke to a youth summit that the Muslim Public Affairs Council organized, trying to teach Muslim youth about how they should be more engaged and more politically active.

What is his -- what is his...

BECK: There`s not a problem. Look, you want to -- you want to speak to people here in the United States and speak to these organizations? I don`t have a problem with you speaking to these organizations. I don`t have a problem with anybody saying that Muslims should be more involved in politics. They should be more involved in politics.

My problem is that when he gave this example -- and he said that they weren`t responsible for 9/11. The government wasn`t responsible, which I thought was a little shady in his actual speech, but, you know, hey, we can all say stupid things off the top of our head.

What was the problem with it is, is he said they then blamed the communists. What is the comparison to the Reichstag? How is it that Bush is compared to the Reichstag? It doesn`t make any sense when you -- when you try to dissect it.

JASSER: You`re exactly right. I mean, this is the part, is that he wants to connect, somehow viscerally, Hitler and dictatorship to the Bush administration and what we`re doing trying to free 50 million Muslims in Iraq and trying to propagandize almost like a sound byte out of al Jazeera.

And if he doesn`t -- the part that`s so irresponsible, Glenn, is the fact that he doesn`t see that what the terrorists use -- the way Islamism works in its political collectivism is demonize the enemy. And the part that he needs to understand is that we`ve concluded that there`s a direct correlation between political Islam or Islamism as a political ideology, whether you condemn terror or not.

There`s a correlation between that and radicalism, and you take someone who is the icon of Muslims in America right now, whether he likes it or not, and actually, it`s a role he`s accepting very willfully.

So he takes that role, and then he makes these flippant statements that he then dismisses as being poorly chosen and almost like a Rosie O`Donnell statement, and yet doesn`t see that there could be a youth who he was just speaking to that would use that and emulate that and say, wait a minute, our administration may be like the Hitler -- Hitler`s Third Reich. And all of a sudden you have a 16-year-old legitimizing terror.

And until he starts to understand that he has an obligation to take on political Islam directly, to take on -- to take on -- to take on Muslim Brotherhood, et cetera, he is not going to have any impact.

BECK: Zuhdi, it is good to hear the voice of Muslims like you on national television. Thank you.

JASSER: Thank you, Glenn.

BECK: Coming up, it has been nearly a month, if you can believe it, since pro wrestler Chris Benoit killed his wife and 7-year-old son. A month?

Today the medical examiner released the toxicology results. What role did steroids play in the tragedy? We`ll have the latest for you.

Plus, will today`s Senate hearings change the fate of our two wrongfully imprisoned border agents? I hope so. We`ll get the straight dope from Lou Dobbs.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Earlier this afternoon investigators released a toxicology report on Chris Benoit, the professional wrestler who killed his wife and his 7-year-old son with his bare hands before eventually hanging himself.

Now, according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, Benoit`s body contained steroids. I didn`t see that one coming. The anti-anxiety drug Xanax and the painkiller hydrocodone.

Benoit`s wildfire, Nancy, tested positive for Xanax and painkillers, as well, and little Daniel Benoit had Xanax in his system.

Luis Fernando Llosa has been following the story. He is the senior investigative reporter for "Sports Illustrated" and SportsIllustrated.com.

Luis, are they thinking now that he sedated both mom and the son before he killed them?

LUIS LLOSA, SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, "SPORTS ILLUSTRATED": Actually, what appears is that they`re saying that the levels in the mom of Xanax and hydrocodone were therapeutic. And so she may have been using painkillers because of some earlier condition.

But with the child, they haven`t speculated, but it is a serious question as to why the kid would have this in his system. It`s not usually used for children in this way.

BECK: OK. Do we know if she`s had any kind of prescription for drugs?

LLOSA: Nobody has indicated as such at this time, but she did have surgeries previously and may have had injuries that -- that called for that type of medication.

BECK: OK. And does she -- or does this explain the needle marks in the son? Were they -- I mean, you can`t inject Xanax, right? That`s just a pill?

LLOSA: No, you don`t inject Xanax, and they haven`t come up with a -- with a plausible explanation for that yet.

BECK: For the needle marks?

LLOSA: For the needle marks, precisely.

BECK: Do we know -- they haven`t -- have they been able to do a full toxicology screening on the son? There was rumor that he was being injected with growth hormones or something by the dad or...

LLOSA: Yes. At this stage that`s pure speculation. We really don`t have any -- any proof of that, and it doesn`t look like the toxicology reports will indicate anything other than that -- you know, we`ll solve that -- that question.

BECK: OK. So what do we do with this now? Give me some perspective on this. Does this mean anything to anybody?

LLOSA: Well, what it appears is that there`s no absolute smoking gun here, but that does not, you know, place the WWE in the position where they can say, well, steroid, "roid rage" was not an issue here, and there are no problems, so you can leave us alone to perform and to -- and to, you know, work with our athletes the way we always have been.

BECK: OK.

LLOSA: A member of the board today actually came out and said that they were going to look at their talent wellness program, the testing program they have, and see if they should make some alterations. They`re looking into this.

BECK: So wait. How does it clear them if he had steroids in his system?

LLOSA: It doesn`t clear them, but then again, they were not on trial. The issue was what did Benoit do?

BECK: Yes, you know what I mean.

LLOSA: Right.

BECK: Does it clear steroids and say that it wasn`t "roid rage", or wasn`t at least from the testosterone that he was taking.

LLOSA: Well, what -- what the authorities said today is that they have no way of marrying the issue of him having high levels of testosterone in his system with "roid rage" -- with a mental impairment or dysfunction or psychotic state that he may have been in.

And because "roid rage" is typically something which is impulsive, it`s -- it`s at odds with the almost theatrical way in which he did away with his family. In other words, the Bible, the methodical chronological killing of his -- of his family.

BECK: It`s a sad story. Luis, thank you very much.

Coming up, we`ll have the "Real Story" on the plight of the two border guards that have been locked up for just doing their jobs. I`ll be joined by Lou Dobbs, and Lou and I will try not to hold back this time. I don`t know. We`ll try. No promises.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Coming up, one week after admitting to relations with the DC madam`s escort service, Senator David Vitter is now denying accusations that he was also escorted in New Orleans. I kind of believe him, and I`ll tell you why in just a bit.

But, first, welcome to "The Real Story." Remember the case of the former Russian spy that was murdered in London with that highly radioactive substance called polonium 210?

Well, Great Britain identified a Russian businessman and a former KGB spy as the chief suspect, but Russia has refused to send him them over to London to face trial. In response to that Britain yesterday announced the expulsion of four Russian diplomats from their country. That prompted Russia to hit back by saying that these measures, quote, "Cannot but lead to the most serious consequences in British-Russian relations."

They are also saying that they are preparing, again a quote, "a targeted response very soon." I don`t think I want to hear Russia say targeting.

Meanwhile, if the mere rhetoric and threats between two nuclear powers just aren`t enough for you, how about a real arms race? Last weekend President Putin announced that Russia will suspend their participation in the NATO Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which basically, I believe, means that the cornerstone of European security is done.

Withdrawing from that means that Russia can build up weapons and troops along their borders while conveniently avoiding inspections.

OK. So what does it mean? Why is Russia causing so many waves? Well, I believe the real story is that Russia has a Napoleon complex. As one member of their parliament recently put it, Russia is being treated by the West as, quote, "a banana republic," and they`re sick of it.

Unless Putin decides is he going to be president for life, which I don`t think is as far fetched as it might sound, a new leader will be elected in Russia next spring, and Putin would like the people to elect the candidate he endorses. A candidate who will continue to turn Russia back into the former Soviet Union.

To have that kind of influence and power Putin needs popularity, and while threatening the West may not be popular in Washington or London, it certainly is popular these days in Moscow. That, I believe, is what this saber rattling is really all about.

The Russians want to feel united again. They want to feel that sense of national pride that they once had. Putin is delivering that pride, but, unfortunately, he is doing it by taking them back to 1962.

Mark Brzezinski is former director for Russia Eurasia at the National Security Council. Mark, where am I wrong here?

MARK BRZEZINSKI, FORMERLY WITH NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: I think your analysis is mostly right, Glenn. I think that Russia is suffering from imperial nostalgia, that it does have memories of the Soviet bloc and the Soviet era, and it feels a profound sense of loss and President Putin has said as much. In fact, in 2005 he said that the demise of the Soviet Union was one of the most catastrophic events of the 20th century.

So I do think that you see a Putin Kremlin trying to assert itself, particularly within the space of the former Soviet bloc. But I would add one thing to your analysis, and that is I think that Russia may have an exaggerated notion of its own strength right now.

Indeed, Russia today is much richer than it was five years ago. Five years ago when Putin came into power, Russia budgeted for $12 a barrel oil. Oil is now well over $60 a barrel, and the Russians have five times cash on hand.

But cash can only buy you so much commitment. Russia is definitely asserting itself financially beyond its borders, but it can only do so much ...

BECK: But they`re also doing some really frightening things. I mean .

BRZEZINSKI: They are.

BECK: I mean, Putin is -- I mean, you`re the expert, not me, but, come on, do you really believe Putin is not behind some of these killings and some of these messages? He is isolating people. He is -- he is killing all of his foes there. He is shutting down the media that disagrees with him. He is really doing some frightening things.

BRZEZINSKI: Well, we don`t know if Russia is behind the killings of, say Litvinenko or even Politkovskaya, but the circumstances are quite perplexing regarding the involvement of the Russian government, and I don`t think the British government would pursue this as aggressively as they`re doing unless they have something.

What is -- what is clear is that democratic rights, democratic organizations have seen a tremendous backpedaling within Russia. That is exactly what has happened within the term of Putin, and what bothers me as an American, Glenn, what bothers me as an American who saw the American government pursue a modernization within Russia, a progression towards democracy within Russia, is that over the last couple of years America consumed by Iraq and troubles elsewhere has been relatively passive in the face of the democratic rollback in Russia.

BECK: It is frightening stuff. Mark, thank you very much. We`ll talk again.

Now, earlier today Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings to figure out whether 11 and 12 years in prison was too harsh of a sentence for U.S. border agents Compean and Ramos. I`ll save everybody in Washington the trouble. Yeah. Yeah, pretty much it is.

For months now we have gone through every aspect of this case, but in the end the real story is that the punishment simply doesn`t fit the crime. Assuming that there even was a crime.

No matter what you think about this case, I haven`t found anybody, anybody, who believes that the equivalent of a murder sentence is fair for these two border guards. Here`s Senator Feinstein questioning U.S. attorney Johnny Sutton, the guy who put the agents behind bars.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, (D) CA: Did the jury know that this 924-C carried a 10-year minimum sentence?

JOHNNY SUTTON, U.S. ATTORNEY: No, ma`am.

FEINSTEIN: To be added on top of the others.

SUTTON: No, ma`am.

FEINSTEIN: I wonder if the outcome of this case would have been different had anyone besides Sutton know a guilty verdict would mean over a decade in prison. Hopefully at a minimum the Senate will open up a formal investigation to look at that, but somehow -- and maybe it was the video of cots that were being rolled into the Senate this morning as part of a TV stunt over the war debate. I doubt that justice will ever be served by our politicians, but Lou Dobbs, host of CNN LOU DOBBS TONIGHT, is in Washington. Lou, how much of a circus is this thing today?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LOU DOBBS, CNN HOST: Well, actually, it was an amazing spectacle, Glenn. It was one of the few times that I have seen in recent memory the United States Senate, five senators, holding a hearing overflow capacity, standing room only. Five senators looking for the truth trying to do the right thing, and zeroing in on the right questions in this case the incredible injustice done to these two former Border Patrol agents.

BECK: Lou, I got to tell you, I was watching it off and on this afternoon as we were getting ready for the show. And all I could think of is what`s the motivation of everybody there in that hearing? Are you telling me that, like, doing the right thing was the motivation?

DOBBS: I truly believe that Senator Dianne Feinstein, who -- Patrick Leahy, the senator, the Judiciary Committee chairman assigned to lead this, and Senator John Cornyn, in particular, those two senators really want to do the right thing. They demonstrated clearly that they`re disgusted with Johnny Sutton, the U.S. attorney`s decision, to prosecute this case. They`re disgusted by the excessive sentences handed down, and they`re disgusted by the fact that immunity -- blanket immunity was given an illegal alien drug smuggler.

There will be ramifications, and I do think they`re trying to do the right thing.

BECK: What do you think those ramifications are? I did see the part where Feinstein was saying, you know, you gave him a humanitarian pass to be able to come back in and out of the country. What were you thinking?

I mean, I mean, I was just outraged. She was outraged. The country should be outraged. What do you think the ramifications are going to be? What`s going to happen?

DOBBS: I believe that what will happen as a result of this hearing, one on July 31st that will be held in the House of Representatives, I think as a result of this we`re going to see two things happen in very quick order.

First of all, the federal appellate court is going to have to respond to what is an outrageous miscarriage of justice. The second thing that`s going to happen is I think Johnny Sutton`s office is going to be strongly condemned for the decision on blanket immunity, the decision to give an open visa to a known illegal alien and confessed illegal alien drug smuggler across our borders in which we know that he had at least one other load.

I think the ramifications are going to be huge. I think we`re going to see justice ultimately delivered.

BECK: I can`t wait.

DOBBS: Delivered for these two former Border Patrol agents.

BECK: That`s great news and you say he was an illegal alien drug smuggler. He was a member of a cartel.

DOBBS: Yes. A member of a cartel. The prosecutors did not question him about his contacts, the organization, or the structure of the cartel or his involvement, nor was there any discussion of any material -- in any material sense, of why within five minutes two vehicles were waiting for him on the other side of the Rio Grande River, which he crossed and they were waiting for him to take him away.

BECK: Lou, I don`t know if you can see me in your return monitor, but I -- we`ve started to sell these on my web site. All the proceeds go to Ramos and Compean`s legal defense fund. It is "U.S. Border Patrol, To Protect and Serve Time." We have all of the proceeds go -- they`re $20 on the Web site at glennbeck.com.

I would love to hand deliver one to your office, sir, if you would like to be one of the first to own one.

DOBBS: You got a deal. Send it to me. You got it. I`ll write another check.

BECK: Hey, Lou, best of luck. Stay safe down there, and thank you for all the hard work you`ve done on this case.

DOBBS: Well, thanks a lot, Glenn.

BECK: Lou, thanks for al your hard work on this. Lou Dobbs, host of CNN LOU DOBBS TONIGHT, 6:00 p.m. Eastern every night on CNN. That`s "The Real Story" tonight.

As we go to break, please let`s remember that Agents Ramos and Compean along with agent Gilmer Hernandez are still rotting in jail. I believe they are this country`s first political prisoners. We`ll be back in just a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Senator David Vitter is back after spending days hiding your honor the covers once he was discovered linked it a Washington escort service. That`s fancy terminology for hookers. Here`s what he had to say for himself.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. DAVID VITTER, (R) LA: I want to, again, offer my deep, sincere apologies to all those I have let down and disappointed with these actions from my past. I am completely responsible, and I am so very, very sorry.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Two "very"s. He must really, really mean it. Senator Vitter says that his wife and God have forgiven him and that he wants to get back to business. Apparently some say that business is being linked to more prostitutes.

You know, the good senator says that he is innocent this time around and that these new accusations are nothing more than smear tactics by his political enemies. Sure, politics is a dirty business, but it`s hard to see a hooker lover like Vitter as a victim.

I`m not without compassion. There is forgiveness, but you do have to reap what you have sewn, and, senator, you made your bed, and now you may have to lie in it alone this time. Jeff Crouere, he is the host of "Ringside Politics." Hello, Jeff. How are you?

JEFF CROUERE, "RINGSIDE POLITICS": All right, Glenn. Very good.

BECK: Good. Now, do you believe him at all on this second one?

CROUERE: No, I don`t, because he has the history with the DC Madam. Seven prostitutes have alleged to have possibly had relations with Senator Vitter. All seven of them would have had to be lying, and Senator Vitter would have to be telling the truth, and his truthfulness is spotty.

BECK: All right. Why would he -- why would he lie on this? I mean, if you are going to come out and say you have been with a hooker, it`s not like anybody has more respect for him because he is like, but I was loyal to that one hooker. I didn`t see any other hookers. I mean, why not just say, I mean, I was .

CROUERE: Well, the only reason he came forward, Glenn, with the DC madam is they had the phone records. He was caught. He had to. But he, I think, believes he can get by with the New Orleans cases because there`s no hard evidence. You just have a he-said-she-said.

BECK: You could rephrase that. Please rephrase that. I think we don`t need to go there. I`m just saying.

CROUERE: What I think we have here is a case of a Republican Bill Clinton, and I think .

BECK: But his problem really is -- I mean, Bill Clinton, you kind of knew what you were getting, and, you know what, look, I don`t know Vitter at all, and, you know, I don`t want to be -- I don`t want to be somebody who is throwing rocks at somebody`s house here. I believe in forgiveness, and when Bill Clinton got on with Hillary, and he said, you know, we`ve all made mistakes on that "60 Minutes" interview, I actually had compassion for the guy after he answered the question. It was like, OK, everybody knows what he`s saying, just leave him alone. However, there is a pattern. Is there any belief that this guy`s pattern has continued, or this is all in his past?

CROUERE: Well, I mean, these allegations stem back to the `90s, Glenn, and go all the way to 2001, and we really don`t know whether they continued past then, so there could be a pattern in both New Orleans and DC and what I`m saying is I think the senator has a lot of explaining to do, and he is not doing it.

He didn`t answer any questions yesterday. All the news media went there ready to ask questions, and he made that very vague statement, so I think the senator is hoping that this sort of goes away.

BECK: I have to tell you I`m surprised that in Louisiana you have, you know, kind of unclean politicians. That`s a surprise. I think to everybody in America. How is the GOP responding to this?

CROUERE: Not well. There`s a division within the Republican Party. You`ve got a candidate running for governor, and David Vitter scheduled this event yesterday to coincide with his announcement, and all of his supporters are upset at David Vitter.

Some are calling for his resignation. Others are backing him. So he`s really sort of split the party. Some are calling him a hypocrite. Others are saying just sort of stand beside him.

BECK: OK.

CROUERE: So we don`t know yet, Glenn, the full result.

BECK: OK. Thanks a lot. Appreciate it. We`ll check in again. Time to take a huge left turn and take you to Kenya, of all places. That`s where this remarkable woman is saving the lives of girls by giving them something many of us take for granted, an education. She is today`s "CNN Hero."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A girl here can get married as young as 10, certainly by 13, a lot of them are already married.

(BEGIN GRAPHIC)

MARGERY KABUYA, CNN HERO: In Maasai culture, a girl can be promised or "booked" for marriage before she is born.

Her family receives a payment in exchange.

Girls are have very, very important because they are thought of as health and wealth. That is why it is very difficult for a Maasai man to let a girl do anything else but get married.

Before a girl gets married here, they must go through the female genital mutilation. When you delay marriage, you delay circumcision.

My name is Margery Kabuya, and we started a school for Maasai girls.

We said OK, what we are going to do is we are going to use the same process of booking the girls. The girls used to be booked for marriage, now they`re just being booked for school.

We go through the exact same ceremony. We monitor the girls when they are six. Another blessing is done and we are given the girl to take to school.

We are not saying the girls should not get married, we are just saying marry them off later.

We have managed to delay -- at least delay -- the female genital mutilation. We will grow up into responsible girls, right?

I think the best thing is that it has given them opportunities that they would never have had. It has opened them and their parents to a different lifestyle.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BECK: Over the years I have heard stupid things that people have done to raise money for charity, but this guest is in a league of his own. He really is. Last month, believe it or not, with very little fanfare, he began counting from one to one million.

Joining me now on the phone from his count center in Birmingham, Alabama, otherwise known as home, is Jeremy Harper. Hello, Jeremy.

JEREMY HARPER, COUNTING TO A MILLION FOR CHARITY: Hi, Glenn. How are you doing?

BECK: I`m -- I`m doing very, very well. What`s your favorite number so far?

HARPER: I would say the current one is 365,504, and then my next favorite is 365,505. If you want to keep going, I change for everyone .

BECK: No, that`s quite OK. How long is this going to take to you complete?

HARPER: Total time it`s looking about 80 days. I`m about -- I would say six weeks left.

BECK: Six weeks. How many hours a day are you counting?

HARPER: Usually I`m up about 16 hours a day. Counting usually somewhere between 12 and 14. I also write a daily blog and eat lunch and things like that, so around about a 16 hour day is the counting.

BECK: Do you have a girlfriend?

HARPER: I do currently. We`ll see if I do in six more weeks, but .

BECK: That`s amazing. What does she think about it? Let me ask you this, how is it we live in a country where a U.S. senator has to get hookers, but you have got a girlfriend?

HARPER: Well, I have to be honest with you, Glenn, at the beginning of this thing she was less than impressed with the idea.

BECK: I can understand. You know, if you have missed this and you can watch him count on the Internet. If you have missed this, I want to go back and see some of the highlights of some of the numbers that you have missed. Here it is, some of the action.

HARPER: 365,068. 361,069. 361,070 -- 361,102. 361,103, 361,104. 362,184 -- 362,185, 362,186.

BECK: Hardest number so far?

HARPER: The hardest number so far was in the -- I think it was 77,777.

BECK: But I hear you have actually experienced an injury.

HARPER: I don`t know about any injuries yet. Go ahead and fill me in on that one.

BECK: I heard that you had sores on your lip because of the 40s and 50s.

HARPER: OK. Yeah, I wouldn`t classify that as an injury. Just a little hurdle.

BECK: My friend, stay safe, and keep fighting the good fight. Jeremy, we`ll talk to you again.

Coming up tomorrow we will be replaying the interview with RFK Jr. from last week in its entirety. We`ll correct a few of his an accuracies and maybe a couple of mine. From New York, good night, America.

END