Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Congressional Republicans on Collision Course With White House Over Ports Deal
Aired March 07, 2006 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT, news, debate and opinion for Tuesday, March 7.
Live in New York, Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everybody.
Tonight, the congressional Republican leadership is on a collision course with the White House. House Majority Leader John Boehner says he wants the Dubai Ports deal and controversy to simply go away.
We'll be live on Capitol Hill.
Also, what is the truth about the United Arab Emirates? Is it a trustworthy ally of the United States as the White House asserts? Or is it still a nexus for radical Islamist terrorism and for nuclear proliferation, as some critics now charge?
We'll have that special report.
My guests are two leading Democratic critics of the Dubai Ports deal, Senator Barbara Boxer, who says our port are a soft target for terrorists, and Congressman Harold Ford, who says America must not outsource its national security.
And a Republican view on another national security threat to this country, border security and illegal immigration. Senator Jeff Sessions is our guest.
All of that and more tonight.
We begin with a rising Republican revolt on Capitol Hill defying President Bush's threat to veto legislation that would block the ports deal and rejecting a compromised proposal by Congressman Pete King. The new House majority leader, John Boehner, is not impressed with efforts to reach a compromise. Boehner insists he wants the controversy to go away, as he put it.
At the same time, House Armed Services Committee chairman Congressman Duncan Hunter is moving ahead with a bill to kill the ports deal outright.
We begin with Ed Henry on Capitol Hill -- Ed.
ED HENRY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Lou.
That's right, very dramatic developments. In fact, still unfolding as we speak.
Just a few moments ago, there was a closed-door meeting that broke up of the House Republican leaders, and I'm told that during that meeting, the entire House Republican leadership from Speaker Dennis Hastert on down endorsed this view by John Boehner that you mentioned that they need to push forward on port legislation later this week, in defiance of this veto threat from President Bush.
And, in fact, I'm total reliably that one proposal to be included is to kill this port deal altogether. No compromise. No King compromise or any other compromise. Kill the port deal altogether.
This Republican revolt here on the Hill began earlier today when John Boehner went out and at a briefing with reporters basically said he believes this is "a political hot potato," a political problem for House Republicans in particular. Every single house Republican up for election in these midterm elections later this year. And he said he'd "like to see it go away."
Boehner vowed that, in fact, they will deal with this by attaching port legislation to a very important bill, the supplemental spending bill that funds military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's a direct poke in the eye of the White House, because this is must-pass legislation.
The White House has made it clear over and over each year as they seek this supplemental bill for the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan. They don't want nothing clouding it up, nothing at all, especially not port legislation.
The question now is exactly what that legislation will say. As you know, Duncan Hunter has a plan. Peter King has a plan. All kind of plans flying around.
Here is what Peter King's bottom line is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PETER KING (R-NY), CHAIRMAN, HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE: I think it's going to be very difficult to come up with any legislation at this time unless it absolutely precludes Dubai Ports from having any role at all in the operations at the ports. And I don't know, again, you know, if they're ready for that, if the administration's ready for that...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HENRY; And now it's clear that this move by congressional Republican leaders is being motivated largely by the political pressure they're feeling from Democrats beating away on this issue. Also, deep concerns on the Republican side as well. But John Boehner's saying that he'd like to see this go away. I can tell you Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid today reacted to that by saying there is no way that Democrats up here on the Hill will let this go away. Whether the deal goes down or not, they're going to continue to beat away on this day after day -- Lou.
DOBBS: Congressman Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the powerful House Armed Services Committee, not only wants to kill this deal, but to make certain that the ownership of all key infrastructure assets in this country is in the hands of Americans and American companies.
Is there any earlier indication as to where that stands amongst the proposals being floated?
HENRY: No, that is the key question. You put your finger on it, Lou, in fact, because he obviously does want to go beyond that.
You also know on the Senate side, Democratic Robert Menendez, Senator Clinton and others want to go forward also with blocking all foreign governments from owning not just on this deal, but any port deal. Any deal.
But the bottom line is, nobody really knows for sure. They're still meeting, various meetings going on, exactly what the legislation is going to be. But I can tell you, one plan that's being floated is just a deal with this one deal, kill it, and then move forward on Hunter and other things, and deal with other deals as they come up. But on this one, just kill it outright -- Lou.
DOBBS: Ed Henry, thank you very much.
Ed Henry following this story, of course, for us on Capitol Hill and will be back developments as they occur here this evening.
The White House is not retreating from its strong support of the Dubai Ports deal. And certainly not retreating from its condescending language toward Congress.
The White House insisting that members of Congress will become more comfortable with the ports deal when lawmakers have what the White House terms a greater understanding of the facts.
President Bush tonight is in Texas to vote in a Republican primary.
Suzanne Malveaux reports from Crawford, Texas -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Lou, White House officials who I have spoken with are really trying to downplay the controversy and even the political fallout from all of this. They are insisting that the president still will veto any legislation that blocks this Dubai port deal. They also say, of course, they're looking at a number of factors, that 45-day period, review period to take a second look here.
They hope that there are some Republicans, at least, in completing that process will be satisfied. They also hope, too, that perhaps some of them will turn. So they are simply hoping that time is on their side.
They also are looking at the Dubai Ports World company, perhaps that they are open to suggestions or ideas about restructuring. Perhaps a new board of directors when it comes to the American operation.
All those, they say, are options that are on the table. But at the same time, the White House is definitely trying to distance itself from the negotiations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: What we are doing is continuing to work very closely with Congress. There have been -- there have been ongoing discussions, as you can imagine, between the company and congressional leaders. We've been involved in those discussions, and we will continue to work with members to make sure that they have the information they need and that they have the facts that they need so that they have a greater understanding of this transaction.
And we believe that as they come to that greater understanding of the facts, that they will be more comfortable with the transaction moving forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: And Lou, so the White House really giving very little details about any of these options. And they really are trying to distance themselves at this point, trying to make sure that the Republicans essentially are fighting this amongst themselves. But obviously, they're on the other side of this, and they are trying to downplay the potential political fallout from all of this -- Lou.
DOBBS: Suzanne, I know it's windy. You're there for the president to actually vote in the primary. Why didn't the president just use an absentee ballot, save the trip?
MALVEAUX: Well, you know, we asked that of Scott McClellan earlier today because he obviously failed the absentee ballot deadline, as well as actually coming forward early. He had an option to do that, but he was in India and Pakistan.
Asked Scott McClellan that question, and whether or not this was part of the plan, and he said, well, sometimes he votes in person, other times he doesn't. The only other two times he voted in person were big elections, 2002 and 2004, of course, for his own re-election.
Asked about whether it would save taxpayers money, a 37 cent stamp as opposed to this visit, McClellan simply would not go there, get into those details. But one official saying, look, it's the cost of doing business. The president travels. And of course he's heading to Louisiana and Mississippi tomorrow -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, as you say, the cost of doing business. And where Scott McClellan might not go there, as you might expect, Suzanne, we will on this broadcast. The trip costing about $40,000. So we appreciate it, and get out of the wind.
Suzanne Malveaux in Crawford, Texas, with the president.
Thank you.
MALVEAUX: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: The White House today said the Committee on Foreign Investments is likely to begin its 45-day review of the Dubai Ports deal shortly. The committee has already begun a new preliminary review that could last up to 30 days, although it is expected it'll be considerably shorter.
And we on this broadcast will begin a countdown clock on that 45- day review as soon as it begins, if it begins.
And tonight, as foreign firms buy up strategic American assets, many are wondering just what in this country is not for sale? From port terminals to highways and airport facilities, foreign firms, some of them government-owned, are looking to buy up as much of this country as they possibly can. And there are trillions of dollars available for their purchases.
Christine Romans reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): A British company controls the power generated from Niagara Falls and is now buying the country's fifth largest gas distributor. The eight-mile long Chicago skyway belongs to an Australian Spanish consortium under a 99-year lease. That same group now offering almost $4 billion to control 157 miles of the Indiana toll road.
KAREN TALLIAN, INDIANA STATE SENATE: These have always been seen as part of America's assets. The biggest question is, if this is such a great deal for a -- for a -- for a foreign investor, why can't Indiana do this itself?
ROMANS: But it appears inevitable there will be foreign control of swaths of the interstate highway system, conceived by President Eisenhower to move our military from coast to coast.
The Indianapolis airport is already run by a British company. A German company controls much of the electricity and gas distribution in Kentucky. And the Bush administration wants to make U.S. airlines available to foreign control. Congressman Frank LoBiondo is fighting that and says everything should not be for sale in this country.
REP. FRANK LOBIONDO (R), NEW JERSEY: I don't think it's probably a threat to have foreign ownership of a coffee shop, although I'd rather see it U.S.-owned. But we get into critical infrastructure, it's a whole different story.
ROMANS: Whether port operations or airports or airlines, he says keeping control of strategic assets is not protectionist, but common sense. And security experts say the U.S. sells control of critical assets in a way the buyers' countries would never allow.
FRANK GAFFNEY, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY: I don't know where that ends. Does it -- does it include nuclear power plants and other pieces of critical infrastructure? I should hope not.
ROMANS: But many fear this country is already well down that road.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: They worry that the top priority of the U.S. government is to fund its deficits. It takes about $20 billion a week of foreign investments in this country just to deal with our trade deficit, Lou. That's about almost three, more than three Dubai Ports deals a week when you think about that.
DOBBS: Absolutely. And the idea that we would continue to sell these assets against the threat now -- primarily brought to you by your local lobbyists -- suggesting anyone who's concerned about a key infrastructure asset is anti-Arab, is racist, is a xenophobe, because we're concerned that in the time of war our airlines would not be available, the aircraft would not be available to move troops. And already we have just about 60 flagged U.S. ships that are owned by the United States out of 10,000 cargo ships of the world.
It's remarkable the position that we have allowed ourselves in this country to get into.
ROMANS: You're absolutely right.
DOBBS: Christine, thank you. Remarkable report.
That brings us to the subject of our poll question tonight. The question is: Do you believe the desire to keep American national security in the hands of Americans is protectionist?
Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results later here in the broadcast.
Vice President Dick Cheney today addressed another critical national security challenge. Vice President Cheney told Iran the international community will take action if Tehran continues with its nuclear defiance.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RICHARD CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the heir responsible conductive (ph) regime.
(APPLAUSE)
And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message, we will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.
(END VIDEO CLIP) DOBBS: Vice President Cheney's remarks following a warning by the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, earlier this week. Bolton said there will be tangible and painful consequences, as he put it, for Iran if it continues with its nuclear program.
Still ahead here, President Bush says he trusts the Dubai government, even as top congressional leaders level serious charges against Dubai.
We'll have that special report for you.
And then, President Bush's Indian nuclear exchange deal is being called an historic failure that will alienate key American allies and accelerate global nuclear proliferation.
We'll have the story.
And the head of our nation's Citizenship and Immigration Services Department defends his agency against fierce congressional attack.
We'll have that report and a great deal more next.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: New questions tonight whether the United Arab Emirates is a reliable ally of this country, as the White House asserts, or a center for radical Islamist terrorism and nuclear proliferation, as some charge. One leading member of Congress, Congressman Duncan Hunter, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has no doubts. Congressman Hunter today declared Dubai is not trustworthy.
Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): The administration insists that the government of the United Arab Emirates can be trusted. The subject of trustworthiness came up again on Tuesday, as congressmen Hunter, Saxton, and LoBiondo introduce their bill on port security.
REP. DUNCAN HUNTER (R), CHAIRMAN, ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: If you are an outlaw regime and you want to receive -- you want to develop a nuclear weapons program, you have your components transshipped through Dubai. Dubai is a master at masking both the recipient of illegitimate weapons systems and the party that is sending, developing, selling those illegitimate weapons systems.
TUCKER: It's a well-known fact that the activities and business of arms merchant and terrorist financier Viktor Bout are tolerated. Bout being a supplier of weapons to the Taliban. * The State Department insists that the UAE is our steady friend at the United Nations, but out of 189 countries, the UAE ranks 176 in support of the American position. And ultimately, it is our security and our ports which are at stake.
SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D), WASHINGTON: I think national security is our issue. And I don't want to see our national security outsourced to anyone. And I think that's why this has raised so many red flags among Americans.
TUCKER: And if the administration thinks this issue is dying down...
SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK: The message I have to the White House is, it's not going away. The American people won't let it go away.
TUCKER: Which means the president could be facing a battle he didn't anticipate.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: Which means the president may not only have to tell us why Dubai can be trusted, he could be also left to explain why he should be trusted on this deal -- Lou.
DOBBS: Bill, thank you very much.
Bill Tucker.
Well, Wolf Blitzer is in Dubai tonight. He's been there all week, where officials continue to defend, of course, the DP World deal.
Wolf, you talked today with the chairman of DP World. Just what did he say? Was he persuasive?
WOLF BLITZER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Sultan bin Sulayem, he's the big boss. He's the guy in charge of this entire Dubai Ports World operation and the deal. He's trying to get it through. He's very confident, he says, that the deal eventually will go through.
Lou, listen to what he said to me earlier in "THE SITUATION ROOM."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Do you feel confident that when all of the dust settles, this deal will go through and DP World will operate these six major ports in the United States?
SULTAN BIN SULAYEM, CHAIRMAN, DUBAI PORTS WORLD: I have no doubt about that at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: I'm not exactly sure, Lou, why he's that confident. But it's not only him. I've spoken now with the CEO, as well as the COO, and a lot of other officials who work at Dubai Ports World here in Dubai, and they think once they get to tell their story to the American public, they think the American public, as reflected in the U.S. Congress, are going to come along.
I'm not exactly sure they're -- they're right, but they do continue to profess that confidence, and they also do continue to profess their confidence in President Bush and his top advisers that they'll eventually push it through. We shall see.
DOBBS: Indeed, we shall. And it won't be for want of hiring lobbyists, getting everyone involved from former President Bill Clinton to former presidential candidate, Senate leader, Bob Dole, and a host of other lobbyists spending a lot of money on this, the White House putting its full backing.
Wolf, let me ask you, you've been there now for some time. And I look at this story as, the nexus of it is in Washington, its impact, of course, nationwide. What have you learned about the story about U.S. national security in the Port of Dubai?
BLITZER: Well, I've learned that they do an excellent job here in the Port of Dubai operating the facilities, all the ships, including U.S. Navy ships, whoa re almost here on a daily base, including aircraft carriers. But it's one thing to do an excellent job in this part of the world. It's another thing, as we all know, to do an excellent job in Baltimore and Philadelphia, New Jersey, and New York, Miami and New Orleans. And those are serious questions that remain unanswered.
When all is said and done, they're going to have to prove that they will protect the U.S. national security interests. And at this particular stage, they have an uphill battle, although as you and I know, publicly they're pretty confident that they'll eventually get the deal -- deal approved.
DOBBS: I suppose you and I should be more surprised were they somewhat timid about it and did not display a public confidence.
In Dubai, would the -- would the emir permit a foreign government to own terminals on the -- on the docks at the port there in Dubai or anywhere else?
BLITZER: Well, so far they don't. Jebel Ali and the Roshan (ph) ports, which are the two major ports -- and they're huge and very, very busy here. These are completely operated by the -- by the government of the United Arab Emirates, through its company, Dubai Ports World.
I will say this, though. Yesterday I spent some time at one pier, at one area of the Dubai port, the Jebel Ali Port, which is basically operated by the U.S. Navy because so many Navy ships do come in here. And even though they hire Dubai Ports World to do the loading and offloading for the U.S. Navy vessels, they do have a lot of the control of the security operation, including their own little fast vessels to prevent another, god forbid, another USS Cole-like attack.
DOBBS: Right.
BLITZER: So the UAE does give the Navy a lot of free reign to do what they want to do.
DOBBS: One would hope that the U.S. Navy would insist on absolute control of their security.
And Wolf, the idea that if this deal as it now appears more likely than ever that it may indeed be denied by the United States Congress, the relationship between the UAE and Dubai in particular, and the United States, where the United States provides protection for the Emirates -- and that's significant given the volatility, the instability of the region -- this relationship, as some suggested, would disintegrate should the United States government insist on taking control of its own national security and operation of terminals at its -- at its ports and the national security interests.
What's your sense of the relationship should that occur?
BLITZER: I think the relationship will be fine. There will be a strain. Certainly there will be great disappointment here if the U.S. Congress prevents this deal from going through.
But you're right, the United Arab Emirates doesn't cooperate with the United States strictly because it wants to do the U.S. a favor. Like Kuwait, like Qatar, like Bahrain and Oman and other countries in the Persian Gulf, they see it in their own best national security interest to have a close working relationship, a strategic relationship with the United States. So they'll survive this setback, although it will be painful for a lot of the people here in the UAE.
DOBBS: Wolf Blitzer, as always, we appreciate it. Reporting tonight from Dubai. And a safe trip home.
Wolf will be back at the top the hour with more from Dubai in "THE SITUATION ROOM," coming up at 7:00 Eastern.
Still ahead, word of a deal that would allow the White House to continue its warrantless wiretapping. We'll have a live report for you on the latest developments from Capitol Hill.
Also tonight, how a government informant helped blow the whistle on incompetence and fraud inside our nation's immigration bureaucracy. That special report ahead.
And I'll be joined by Senator Barbara Boxer. The senator says the nation's ports are easy targets for terrorists. She's outraged that the administration would even consider the Dubai Ports deal.
All of that, a great deal more, still ahead here tonight.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Tonight, the head of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is responding to stunning charges of fraud and corruption within his agency. All of this as an explosive new report on widespread national security breakdowns within this department is set for release.
Lisa Sylvester reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): (INAUDIBLE), but critics say the agency tasked with guarding immigration benefits is not taking its role seriously. Immigration and Customs Enforcement warned the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in a December memo that it's process of "verification, issuance, and subsequent management of the Permanent Resident Cards is vulnerable."
In one example, seven green cards were issued to seven different people all using the same alien registration number. USCIS employees apparently did not bother checking a computer database that had the original applicants' pictures and prints on file.
And allegations of fraud extend to within USCIS. There are 2,300 employee misconduct complaints, including charges of bribes for benefits.
ROSEMARY JENKS, NUMBERSUSA: A USCIS employee telling an applicant that the applicant will get the immigration status that he or she is looking for if the applicant provides something of value to the adjudicator. Money, sex...
SYLVESTER: A USCIS whistleblower has provided documents to lawmakers that raise troubling questions. In a letter, Senator Charles Grassley accused the agency of focusing on customer service to the exclusion of homeland security. A culture in which promotions are given partly based on production standards, as outlined in this document. Employees are rated by how fast they process applications, not necessarily by how well they are handled.
The new head of USCIS response?
EMILIO GONZALEZ, DIRECTOR, CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES: I think that good customer service and security awareness go hand in hand, and I don't think they're mutually exclusive. When you reach a point where you have to choose one or the other, my instruction to the field is you choose security.
SYLVESTER: But CNN has learned that some the employees tasked with screening the applications for citizenship do not have high-level background clearances required to make sure the applicants are not criminals or terrorists. The reason? Money.
In this November e-mail, a senior USCIS official questions, "What would it cost and how long would it take to run those background checks?"
GONZALEZ: Some of those folks who don't have the requisite clearances have been grandfathered, but it hasn't really affected our operational ability to do the job in the field, which is where most of this is done. SYLVESTER: Congress is considering a guest worker program. USCIS would be in charge of implementing the program. But critics pose the question, if the agency is struggling now, how will it manage when it's faced with millions of more applications?
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: In an off-camera briefing, USCIS' director said they would contract out some of the guest worker screening. But several agencies, including the GAO and the Inspector General's Office, have questioned the use of contractors, saying it exacerbates the problems of fraud and security loopholes -- Lou.
DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much -- Lisa Sylvester from Washington.
Later here, I'll be talking with Senator Jeff Sessions, who says Senator Arlen Spector's new immigration bill is like an eight-foot bridge attempting to cross a 10-foot ravine.
And tomorrow here, Senator Chuck Grassley joins me. He's accused the Citizenship and Immigration Services Department of ignoring fraud and corruption. He'll be our guest.
Let's take a look now at some of your thoughts. Kim in Oregon wrote in to say: We live in the land of double speak. The guest worker program should be called what it is, the president's cheap foreign labor program. Immigrants who come here legally have a vested interest in the future of our nation. Our policies should reward legal immigration and discourage illegal immigration. Can you tell the politicians?
Well, Kim, you just did.
And Mike in South Carolina wrote in about the president's trip to India: The president's solution of more education and training is suspect when the very jobs we are outsourcing are high-tech jobs. I am an engineer with a master's degree in computer science. I know my job has been outsourced. Those fruit picking jobs are beginning to look pretty good. Perhaps I can displace an illegal alien. But wait, then Bush will get the credit for creating another American job.
And Teri in Massachusetts: Dear Lou, global economy be damned. It took me two hours on the phone today to try and explain to Dell representatives in India that they had sent me the wrong printer ink. My concern for the working class does not end at our country's borders, but we all know the only reason American firms use these people is because they're cheap labor.
And Fran in Colorado: As an older American, I must say I've lived most of my life without Indian or other mangoes. What's up next? Is George W. going to help Cuba and South America with nuclear devices so we can have bananas and coffee?
Send us your thoughts at loudobbs.com. We have a lot more of your thoughts coming up later here. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld today gave Iran one of the clearest warnings yet to stay out of Iraq. The secretary of defense said Iranian revolutionary guards have been infiltrating into Iraq. Rumsfeld also accused U.S. and Arab news organizations of exaggerating the level of violence in Iraq. Jamie McIntyre reports from the Pentagon. Jamie?
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Pentagon argues that the level of violence in Iraq is actually down in January and February compared to the same time last year and only up slightly since the previous two months.
Rumsfeld argues that the perception that Iraq is on the brink of civil war is a misperception, fueled by what he says are exaggerated accounts by U.S. and Arab media about the number of Iraqi deaths and attacks on mosques.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: Interestingly, all of the exaggeration seem to be on one side. It isn't as though there simply have been a series of random errors on both sides of issues. On the contrary, the steady stream of errors all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those for who hope for success in Iraq.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: Rumsfeld, along with his top adviser, Joint Chiefs Chairman General Peter Pace, argued that the fact that Iraqi troops were able to take the lead in quelling the violence, as well as the fact that Iraqi government leaders called for calm and didn't incite the situation was evidence that Iraq is not on the brink of civil war. He did, however, concede that it may be the case that this violence could dim the prospects for further U.S. troop cuts in Iraq, which were hoped to be accomplished over the next couple of months. Lou?
DOBBS: So, let me be -- let me make sure that you've explained it so at least I can understand. Is the defense secretary saying there is no prospect whatsoever then of civil war?
MCINTYRE: No, he admits that there's a potential for civil war but he says there's always been a potential in Iraq, a country that was cobbled together from three disparate groups. What he says is that he doesn't see any progress toward reaching that potential for civil war. In fact he sees indicators that indicate the country is going to stay together.
DOBBS: If he sees those indicators and has confidence in the Iraq government, the new constitution, a new government, fighting force that he says is doing terrific, why don't we bring our troops home?
MCINTYRE: Well, the Pentagon is considering further troop cuts, and the U.S. is trying to continue to move its troops back out of the line of fire and put Iraqi troops out in front and Rumsfeld claims that what has happened in this latest round of violence.
DOBBS: And to date, 2,304 of our men and women in uniform have died in combat in Iraq. Jamie McIntyre from the Pentagon, thank you.
Still ahead, Congressman Harold Ford running for the U.S. Senate, running away from the Dubai ports deal? Not a chance. A leading Senate Republican gives us a progress report on plans for a double- barrel guest worker program. All of that and more still ahead, stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Joining me now with his thoughts on the Dubai ports deal, Congressman Harold Ford, he's running for the U.S. Senate in Tennessee and he's out with a new campaign ad attacking this deal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAROLD FORD (D), TENNESSEE: President Bush wants to sell this port and five others to the United Arab Emirates, a country that had diplomatic ties with the Taliban, the home of two 9/11 hijackers, whose banks wired money to the terrorists. I'm running for the Senate because we shouldn't outsource our national security to anyone.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Congressman Ford says this deal is not a Democrat, a Republican issue. He calls it an American security issue. Joining me tonight from Capitol Hill, good to have you with us, Congressman.
FORD: Thanks for having me on and thanks for your honesty and your steadfastness and the way you forcefully handle this issue. You have prodded this along and should -- deserve a great deal of credit for it.
DOBBS: That's very kind of you, Congressman. Let's turn to this ports deal as a platform issue in your campaign. Is it to the people of Tennessee, is it resonating with them?
FORD: I think there's traction all across the country. And you know, Chuck Schumer deserves considerable credit as well, because this deal probably would have gone through. You raised it, he raised it and it's now forced my Republican colleagues to deal with it in a very serious way.
This is the one issue since I've been in Congress that -- or at least since George Bush has been president that has united Democrats and Republicans around the issue of national security. And it's my hope that, if indeed the Republicans are serious with what you reported earlier in your show, to come together to block this deal, we should do that right away.
DOBBS: You talked about the unity on this deal that has grown up in Congress and that's exactly right, yet you say it's not Republican or Democratic issue. This Republican White House is adamant. There is dug in on it, driving a commercial dealing, the likes of which I have not seen -- I have just not seen.
FORD: It's raised a lot of eyebrows and questions in my state amongst a lot of just ordinary people who wonder aloud if there are other motivations as part of this deal.
I don't want to go anywhere near making those kind of accusations but when you consider the outright anger and backlash against this, not from just from Congress, but from the American people, you will think the president would not turn a deaf ear.
But I tell you, he's suffering from two or three other things. One, the thought, or the suggestion that there were weapons of mass destructions. There were none. The fact that he said that we were not treating prisoners wrongly at Abu Ghraib. He happened to be wrong. And when he said that we had a real coherent strategy in Iraq, an exit strategy, he was wrong.
So all of this has caused much of his support bay, his key support base back in Tennessee to question him, which is why I think the backlash of this deal is so much stronger than they anticipated.
DOBBS: Let's talk about what Congressman Duncan Hunter, your colleague in the House, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, he's saying the key infrastructure assets in this country, including the operation of terminals, some of which are operated by government-owned companies, which is another story in itself how it ever came to be. I think we in the national media deserve great blame for permitting that to go without recognition until now. Can you get on board with a Congressman Hunter on his legislation?
FORD: I will be. And we take blame. I take personal blame. Because I was unaware. I'm a member of Congress now for nine years and did not know that. I think many of us are probably in that boat. Now that we have learned, we should take steps to correct that.
As I have stated in my ad I don't believe we should outsource our security to anyone. Not Great Britain, not China, not Russia, not Mozambique and not the UAE.
This is not some racist or xenophobic or effort to take action against Muslim or Islam. We're the United States. And if you can't defend yourself, fund yourself, or power yourself which we clearly have issues and challenges with today, you have to ask the question, what kind of country are we and what are we becoming?
We should not outsource our national security and hopefully we will take steps this week to end this deal at least from Congress' standpoint and perspective.
DOBBS: Congressman Harold Ford, thanks for being here.
FORD: Thanks for having me.
DOBBS: Congress needs to know how you feel about this Dubai ports deal. You can reach Congressman Peter King, he's the Chairman the House Homeland Security Committee at pete.king@mail.house.gov. To reach Senator Susan Collins, Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, go to www.collins.senate.gov, click on the e-mail link. And we will put those up on our Web site on loudobbs.com as well so if you didn't get that down it will be available there later.
Tonight, Senate leaders say they will introduce legislation that would give them new oversight powers over U.S. warrantless wiretap programs. This compromise legislation would give the president powers to conduct surveillance work without a warrant but with strict congressional review.
Under this legislation, the compromised program would be reviewed every 45 days by Congress.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. PAT ROBERTS, (R-KS) INTEL, CMTE. CHMN.: Before our last recess, I asked the members of the Intelligence Committee to give me more time to continue these discussions in the hope of reaching an accommodation, not confrontation, with the administration on both the oversight and the legislative fronts. The committee agreed to continue the discussion. And we convene today to take stock of where we are.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: The compromise effort still ongoing.
Still, ahead here, Senator Jeff Sessions will join us. He'll tell us why Senator Arlen Spector's immigration deal doesn't go far enough. I'll be talking with Senator Barbara Boxer who says the Dubai ports deal proves this administration has taken leave of reality. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The Senate is finally addressing the crisis over border security and illegal immigration. My guest is one Republican who says Senator Arlen Specter's new immigration bill amounts to an eight foot bridge trying to cross a 10 foot ravine. Senator Jeff Sessions joins us now from Capitol Hill. Senator, good to have you with us.
This legislation, everyone I've talked with in the Senate, I'm trying to make sure that's right. I believe it's everyone I have talked within the U.S. Senate, says this deal is baked. The president is going to get his guest worker program and deliver just about exactly what the president wanted. And a lot of folks in the House, come November, are going to be hung out to dry.
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS, (R-AL) JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well I don't know about politics of it, other than to say the American people are not going to be happy with anyone who produces a bill that does not work. It did not work in 1986. We had 3 million people here illegally then. And they came up with a bill that didn't work. And now 20 years later, we have 11 million or more in this country illegally. So, we've got to take some time. We should slow down and make sure that this bill does what it says it's going to do. It can't be another bill that is a facade of enforcement that doesn't work.
DOBBS: Senator, the elements of bill and I'll be talking with Senator Specter here tomorrow evening. The elements are basically legalize millions of illegal aliens that are here and another to provide for a future flow of workers. What are your thoughts on that approach?
SESSIONS: Well, it's a huge increase in the number of people who'd come here legally to work. Plus as you note, a mechanism that would basically legalize the people that are here. I think we really need to think about how much this country can absorb.
Ideally, what we would do is create a legal system that works. Tie that down absolutely tightly. Figure out how many new people should come and go every year. And then confront this question of what to do about those that are here illegally already.
And so this bill -- they want to put it all together and rush it through. What we're liable to get is amnesty for the people who are here an enforcement system that goes eight feet across the ravine but doesn't get us there.
DOBBS: Well, as you say, that ravine whatever the distance, what is the aversion to dealing with, in this time of a global war on terror, as the administration puts it, why in the world can the Senate, in all conscience and sense of responsibility to the American people, that is American citizens, not demand border security?
SESSIONS: I really can't understand it, frankly. I know people believe that immigrants are good for America. But let's create a legal system and allow good people here with clean backgrounds to come and work here in a legitimate fair way. Let's don't excuse a system that allows the most dangerous people to come across our borders and leaves us insecure.
DOBBS: Senator, the House has taken a lead in what is now an outright revolt against the White House in the Dubai ports deal. Your leader, Senator Bill Frist exercised what I call a one-week profile in courage and seems to get in the line with the White House. Where do you stand on the Dubai ports deal, and what will be Senate position.
SESSIONS: I haven't supported the president's view on this. I think it does add to our risk. Although having met with the Defense Department officials and understood it more clearly, it's probably less risky than I thought. But I don't think it should be confirmed, affirmed in its present plan. I do not support it as it presently exists.
DOBBS: Senator Jeff Session, thank you very much. We appreciate you being here.
SESSIONS: Thank you.
DOBBS: Still ahead, I'll be talking with Senator Barbara Boxer who says the Dubai ports deal is straight out of fantasy land. Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The overwhelming majority of Americans opposes outsourcing port operations to a foreign government with links to terrorism. One U.S. senator finds the idea nothing less than surreal. Dubai Ports executive Ted Bilkey told the Senate Commerce Committee he doesn't know what's inside containers that his company handles. Senator Barbara Boxer responded: "I don't know if I'm in Barbara in Wonderland, but sometimes I feel that way."
Senator Barbara Boxer joins me now from Capitol Hill. Senator, thanks for joining us.
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D), CALIFORNIA: Thanks for having me.
DOBBS: Let's turn to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. He said that he thinks that law enforcement might have a better handle on port security if Dubai Ports takes over this operation. How do you respond to that?
BOXER: All I can say is, I don't know what this administration is thinking. Today a letter went to Lindsey Graham, Republican colleague of mine in the Senate, and it was from the second in command at the Ports Authority in New York and New Jersey. And guess what they said, Lou? That the terminal operator is a major player, one of the key players in port security. And actually went through everything they're supposed to do.
They control who comes in and goes out of the port. They're in charge of loading and unloading vessel cargo. They're in charge of perimeter security, including hiring security guards. They have to cooperate with customs. It goes on and on.
DOBBS: And Senator, we've been reporting that from the outset, that...
BOXER: Good for you.
DOBBS: ... first the denial that terminal operator's involved in security, then the suggestion that there were no objections on the CFIUS committee members to this deal, no concerns raised whatsoever. The list goes on of misinformation, in point of fact, at least initial, to be fair, misinformation on the part of the administration.
Why in the world should the United States Senate or the U.S. House approve a deal that gives control or ownership of key U.S. infrastructure to foreign companies or foreign governments?
BOXER: Well, we shouldn't do it, Lou. And we should start with this one. We should just stop this deal in its tracks, and then we should take a look at everything we've done in the past, and see what we need to do to straighten this mess out.
You know, it seems to me -- I don't know how to put this. I'm trying to be diplomatic, but you...
DOBBS: On this broadcast, you don't have to be diplomatic, Senator.
BOXER: OK, then I'll just be myself.
DOBBS: There you go.
BOXER: You know, in this case, I think the Bush administration is kind of playing the American people for fools. How could they alert us every day, warn us every day -- which is appropriate by the way -- there's al Qaeda networks here, we've got problems, this is a long war, this is something we have to worry about. It's a red alert and an orange alert and the yellow alert.
And then actually give this deal to a country that was involved in 9/11? And we know, you've gone over that and over that again and again. So how could we do this? It just is crazy, and it's just on its face wrong. And we should stop it in its tracks and then look at the whole policy. And many of us are planning to do that and have bills to do that.
DOBBS: The idea that the Senate right now is coming together on the issue of port security, and at least in the Dubai Ports deal, Republicans and Democrats. Do you believe -- what is your judgment, is this deal going to go ahead, or do you believe that the Congress, the Senate and the House will be successful in resisting the White House?
BOXER: I am a little nervous about the end game here, Lou, to be honest. Because some of my colleagues -- and I'll just mention Senator Frist, who right at the outset was pretty good on this. I find a little bit of back-peddling here. When the administration said, well, we'll take 45 days. Actually, it was the company itself that said -- but that doesn't change the reality, to get back to the way you put it so straightforwardly, that in this post-9/11 world, we have got to run our own infrastructure.
So another 45 days, or as Byron Dorgan said, 45 minutes or 45 seconds, we don't really need. What we need is to stop this deal in its tracks and reform the way we do all of this, and make sure that we are protecting the American people, 80 percent of whom oppose this deal. They're smart. They get it.
DOBBS: Indeed they do. And we thank you, Senator Barbara Boxer, for being with us here tonight. Thank you.
BOXER: Thanks, Lou.
DOBBS: A reminder to vote in our poll tonight. The question is: Do you believe the desire to keep American national security in the hands of Americans is protectionist? Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. It's amazing, the number of people pushing this deal who say it's protectionist, xenophobic or outright racist.
We'll bring you the results of our poll in just a few moments here. Plenty more still ahead. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight: 90 percent of you do not believe the desire to keep American national security assets in the hands of Americans is protectionist.
Now, let's look at some more of your thoughts. Judy in Virginia saying: "Isn't the port issues the same regardless of how much we know about Dubai? Isn't this still a government-owned company that wants to control operations at six of our ports? I know plenty about Canada and Great Britain, but I don't want those governments operating our ports either."
Sandy in Florida: "If Dubai can purchase our ports from a British company, then who may they be able to sell us to, if this process is not changed?"
And Richard in Florida: "Now that we know that Dubai and China and many other foreign companies own America, I hope our new owners take better care of their assets than our government has for the past 50 years."
And Elizabeth in Kansas: "The only thing that scares me more than having foreign companies manage our ports is having our federal government manage them."
And Margaret in Nevada: "I used to be embarrassed with the American 'we're number one' attitude. Now, I'd like to hear it once in a while."
I know what you mean.
And Richard in Arizona: "Hey, Lou, how come President Bush doesn't seem to know about anything until after it goes wrong?"
Maureen in Virginia: "Marie-Antoinette said to the French people, 'let them eat cake,' and now Bush says to the American people, 'let them eat mangoes.' Perhaps she's not the only one who lost her head."
And Larry in Michigan: "Lou, will you please stop trying to get the borders closed? The way King George and the court jesters in Washington are running this country, some of us might need to get out."
We love hearing your thoughts. Send them to us at loudobbs.com. Each of you whose email is read here receives a copy of my book, "Exporting America."
We thank you for being with us tonight. Please join us here tomorrow when among my guests will be the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Senator Arlen Specter, the author of sweeping immigration reform legislation. He'll be with us. And Senate Finance Committee Chairman Senator Chuck Grassley, who's investigating charges of fraud and corruption within our nation's immigration bureaucracy. Please be with us.
For all of us here, thanks for watching. Good night from New York. "THE SITUATION ROOM" begins right now with Wolf Blitzer in Dubai -- Wolf.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
