Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs This Week
Campaign Finance Controversy; Salmonella Evidence Examined; Do Candidates Understand the Economy?
Aired June 22, 2008 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LOU DOBBS, CNN HOST: Tonight, Barack Obama breaks his promise to the American people. The senator rejects public financing of his campaign. The first candidate to reject public funding since Watergate. Senator McCain says he'll stick with public financing, thank you. And Congressmen Ted Poe and Walter Jones join me. They're calling to a federal investigation in the prosecution of former Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean.
And thousands may be sickened by contaminated tomatoes. Why can't the FDA protect the American public? We'll have all of that and much more with an independent perspective straight ahead here tonight.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS THIS WEEK. News, debate and opinion.
Here now, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening, everybody. Senator Obama breaking a promise to the American public. He says no to public financing for his campaign. He is the first presidential candidate to bypass the public financing system since it was put in place in the aftermath of Watergate. Senator McCain's reaction sharp and swift saying Obama's decision should be disturbing to all Americans. And Senator McCain says he will accept public financing. Candy Crowley has our report from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Reporter: if you raise more than a quarter billion dollars in the primary season, would you limit yourself to $85 million in the fall campaign? Duh.
SEN. BARACK OBAMA, (D) IL: Hi, this is Barack Obama. I have an important announcement and I wanted all of you, the people who built this movement from the bottom up to hear it first. We made the decision not to participate in the public financing system for the general election.
CROWLEY: In Web video announcement which includes a handy "donate" link, Barack Obama made history. He will become the first presidential nominee to refuse public financing in a general campaign. Legal and expected, all would be OK except for the video trail of this kind of thing, date line, New Hampshire, April, 2007.
OBAMA: I have been a public supporter of public financing since I got into politics. CROWLEY: And in late November, Obama responded to and then signed a questionnaire stating "I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to pursue a publicly financed general election. A decided underdog in the money race, John McCain still believes he has a political issue.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This is a big deal. It's a big deal. He has completely reversed himself and gone back not on his word to me, but the commitment that he made to the American people. That's disturbing.
CROWLEY: Aboard the very symbolic "Straight Talk" Express, McCain drew the bright line, telling reporters he will take public funding because he said he would. McCain's campaign helpfully provided a time line of Obama's evolution on the subject, while the Republican National Committee plucked some primary quotes from Hillary Clinton shortly after Obama began to send off signals he would opt out of the campaign finance system. "Now," she said, "we're seeing how the words don't even mean what we thought they meant." Lawyers for both campaigns have slightly different versions on whether there was any serious talk about an agreement, but it doesn't change the bottom line. This fall Obama will be able to spend what he can raise, the fuel he needs as he tries to define himself to a public still learning about him.
The first ad of his general campaign goes up Friday.
OBAMA: If I have the honor of taking the oath of office as president, it will be with a deep and abiding faith in the country I love.
CROWLEY: Obama's decision not to take public funding is criticized even by some friends as a mistake. And it's hard to spin his position his position as anything other than a 180. Obama advisers try. They argue the campaign is the reform everybody is talking about. Fuelled largely by low-dollar donations from donors who don't even expect a thank you note in return.
Candy Crowley, CNN Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Senator McCain and Senator Obama are battling for each and every vote in what is a very tight race for the White House. Both candidates know they must appeal to independents. And as our Bill Schneider now reports, neither candidate seems to have any edge at all with those independent voters.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST (voice-over): Independents hold the key to victory. Both contenders know it.
MCCAIN: I don't know if you would call it a maverick, but I certainly have issues that I think can attract Independents.
OBAMA: As important as it is for Democrats to be unified, it's also important that we reach out to Independents.
SCHNEIDER: Who has got the edge with Independents? Two new polls give the same answer, neither candidate. "The Washington Post"/ABC News poll finds Independents split. So does the CNN poll by the Opinion Research Corporation; 45 percent for Barack Obama; 45 percent for John McCain.
Independents remember have no brand-name loyalties. Bizarre as it may sound, they actually look at the candidates and the issues and then make up their minds. So what do they think of the candidates? Do they hate them both?
Actually, they like them both McCain somewhat more than Obama. On the issues, however, Independents are not happy at all. Seventy- eight percent think the economy is lousy; 72 percent oppose the war in Iraq, which explains why Independents are so down on the Republican Party.
Only 33 percent have a favorable opinion of Republicans; 53 percent like the Democrats, big difference. If Independents are so down on Republicans, why do so many of them support McCain? Because most Independents think McCain will be different from Bush. Otherwise, McCain wouldn't have a chance.
OBAMA: You're Democrats who are tired of being divided. You're also republicans who no longer recognize the party that runs Washington and independents who are hungry for change.
SCHNEIDER: If independents are so down on Republicans, why do so many of them support McCain? Because most independents think McCain will be different from Bush. Otherwise McCain wouldn't have a chance.
(on camera): Independents don't like the Republican brand but they do like McCain. For independents, the brand comes second. For partisans t the brand comes first. A reporter once asked Harry Truman, do you vote for the man or for the party? Truman answered, I always vote for the best man. He is the Democrat. Bill Schneider, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: The United States and communist China this week agreed to expand Chinese investment in this country. U.S. and Chinese officials meeting this week, a two-day meeting for a fourth round of what is called a strategic economic dialogue. Critics say the united states shouldn't be offering any concessions the to the Chinese until China plays by the rules. Whatever they may be. Kitty Pilgrim has our report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Treasury Secretary Paulson meeting with China's Vice Premier Wan Xixang (ph) launched a new series of talks to open the United States to Chinese investment.
HENRY PAULSON, TREASURY SECRETARY: We're getting to the point where they have more companies of the size and stature and financial resources, they're going to want to invest outside of their country. PILGRIM: He came under criticism by the Chinese press over the treasury's CIFIUS review process that bans foreign investment in strategic U.S. industries.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Chinese is a little bit concerned about the protectionists in the United States as the United States is asking openness of the Chinese financial market. What's your comment on that?
PILGRIM: But instead of the defending the review process, Paulson seemed more interested in appeasing the Chinese.
PAULSON: We had a good conversation about investment and we talked about sovereign wealth funds and again explained we're open to investment, very open.
PILGRIM: Some members of Congress said China has done little to address past trade concerns and the U.S. should not be granting new concessions on investment. Congresswoman Debbie Stabenow met with the Chinese vice premier today and didn't hold back.
REP. DEBBIE STABENOW, (D) MI: Well, I'm very concerned, first of all, we're talking about entering into other agreements when we're not even enforcing the ones we have. My message to them was certainly in the global economy, we want to do business with them, but we need them to stop manipulating their currency. We need them to stop sending in counterfeit products into our country and stop subsidizing illegally what they do.
PILGRIM: She's one of 11 senators who have written to Secretary Paulson pointing out even though the Chinese government claims to have allowed its currency to appreciate 19 percent ,the Chinese currency is still undervalued by 40 percent.
Kitty Pilgrim, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Up next, Americans working harder and working longer for less. I'll be joined by three of the best economic minds to talk about why these presidential candidates don't act as if they have a clue.
And a major victory for American workers. The General Accountability Office says the Air Force was wrong to award that tanker contract to the European consortium that builds the Airbus. We'll have the report and the FDA demonstrating its total inability to do its job as thousands now may be affected by contaminated tomato.
Stay with us for all of that and a great deal more, still ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The Food and Drug Administration now says it is likely that thousands of Americans, not hundreds, have been sickened by the salmonella contaminated tomatoes. But the FDA still has not, it says, found the source of the contamination and there is now a growing confusion and concern about the safety of if entire U.S. tomato crop.
Louise Schiavone has our report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There are no answers yet about how or where it started. But the Centers for Disease Control believe the salmonella outbreak linked to tomatoes has affected thousands.
DR. DAVID ACHESON, ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER, FDA: For every case we see in our surveillance system, it's estimated there are 30 more cases that actually occur. So this outbreak likely represents many thousands of people, several thousands of people.
SCHIAVONE: For the record, the Food and Drug Administration still suspects Florida and Mexico principally, but officials are retreating from a decision that Mexico had spotted its own salmonella cases.
ACHESON: Mexico getting back to us with that specific information. I believe that they are -- they have -- think they have found some cases of salmonella saintpaul's.
SCHIAVONE: One day later, this retraction.
ACHESON: What I said yesterday is I believed that there were some cases in Mexico. It appears that I was incorrect.
SCHIAVONE: One source at the agency told LOU DOBBS TONIGHT that there were concerns that the FDA had been quote, "too hard on the Mexicans." So as the probe continues, investigators are immersed only in paperwork.
ACHESON: Because we haven't identified a specific farm, then no FDA investigators are not yet out in Florida or anywhere else looking for where something may have gone wrong because we don't know yet where to send them.
SCHIAVONE: Doctors and scientists agree in an era of global markets, food quality worries are ever where.
DR. JONATHAN JACOBS, NY PRESBYTERIAN, CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER: We live in a time where food products from around the world can come into this country and quickly, as we have seen from this outbreak, spread quite widely. We have to be very vigilant.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE (on camera): So, Lou, as far as the FDA is concerned, Mexicans not investigating their own cases of salmonella poisoning. And one food safety expert in academia says it's still fair to wonder what's going on, whether or not Mexico has the science. This academic said to me one man's science is another man's non-tariff trade barrier. So the Mexicans are very, very concerned about how all the talk of the salmonella outbreak is affecting their ability to sell their product to the United States. DOBBS: You mean to tell us that the FDA is more concerned about the feelings of some in the Mexican government than the safety of American consumers. Why isn't there a criminal investigation of the FDA going on at this very moment?
SCHIAVONE: The FDA wouldn't put it that way. The FDA would say, yes, of course they're concerned which is why they're going through all these efforts to try to find the source of the outbreak. But what they're saying is they're trying to treat everyone fairly. They don't have any ...
DOBBS: Their job is to protect the American consumer. They're not in the justice and diplomatic business. They're in the business of protecting the American consumer. Even though they've operated for some time as if they have no responsibility at all.
SCHIAVONE: They don't have the science to prove where it's coming from. They don't have the ability to prove where it's coming from. That's why we're at this juncture with an outbreak which the CDC says they're even not sure it's peaked yet. It could be thousands upon thousands of people who have gotten this.
DOBBS: And when did we first learn that the ratio of reported cases to those they believe actually have the cases? When did we first hear that number? From the FDA.
SCHIAVONE: It's the CDC that does these case estimates. They did have on their website there could be thousands of actual cases as opposed to the 228 they were able to document. Those cases they document because they take samples. They run the genetic strand.
DOBBS: Which is now over 300.
SCHIAVONE: Now it's almost 400. The first case reported that they diagnosed was April 10th. The first case they reported was April 10th, Lou. April 10th.
DOBBS: You know, I've heard a lot of reasons over the years as to why George W. Bush should be impeached. But for them to leave the Food and Drug Administration in this state, its leadership in sorry condition. And to have no capacity apparently or will to protect the American consumer, that is alone to me sufficient reason to impeach a president who has made this agency possible and has ripped its guts out in the ability to protect the American consumer. It's insane what's going on here. Is there any sense of embarrassment on the part of the leadership of that agency?
SCHIAVONE: I sense that they actually are embarrassed. I think that they're frustrated. They're waiting for new money so that they can put in new investigators. But here's the thing. They do have investigators. They can't say how many. But they do have investigators.
DOBBS: They can't say how many?
SCHIAVONE: They can't even estimate how many investigators are on this case. But the investigators are in offices checking paperwork. They're not on any farms anywhere.
DOBBS: Because they're afraid to offend the Mexican government. Because they're afraid of what? I mean, there is no reason in this. This is utter madness.
Louise, thank you very much. Stay on it. I know you're as frustrated as any of us. In some ways more so I'm sure. Louise Schiavone, thank you very much.
Up next, new develops in the case of border agents Ramos and Compean. Lawmakers calling for an investigation into the prosecutor who brought that case.
A victory for Boeing, American workers and national security. Even common sense a victor in this one. A stunning turn of events in the Air Force tanker deal. We'll have that and more. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Lawmakers tonight demanding the Pentagon reopen bidding on the refueling tanker contract. The outcry following a General Accounting Office recommendation that the air force reopen bidding for the $35 billion contract. The Department of Defense originally awarding the contract to Northrop Grumman and the European consortium that builds Airbus and not to Boeing. Lisa Sylvester has our report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REP. TODD TIAHRT (R), KANSAS: I want to start this press conference with one word, vindication.
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Lawmakers from Washington State and Kansas unfurled a small banner as they took their victory lap. They had criticized the Air Force's decision to award a $35 billion contract to build the next generation of refueling tankers to a European group partnered with Northrop Grumman instead of U.S.- based Boeing.
A new Government Accountability Office report concluded that the Air Force had made a number of significant errors that could have affected the outcome of what was a close competition. The GAO recommended the Pentagon redo the bidding process.
SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D), WASHINGTON: That is good news for American workers, it is good news for our national security and it is good news for our economy.
SYLVESTER: Among the findings, that the Air Force did not follow its own evaluation criteria in making the decision. The European team should not have earned points for offering a large size Airbus 330 refueling plane because that was not what the Pentagon requested. Boeing did not receive credit for offering more technical requirements than its competitor when it should have. And the Air Force made errors calculating the cost of the planes over their life cycles, when corrected Boeing's 767 cost less. ROBERT SCOTT, ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE: It seems that the Air Force in this case was clearly putting its thumb on the scale in favor of Airbus.
SYLVESTER: Boeing in a statement said quote, "We welcome and support today's ruling by the GAO fully sustaining the grounds of our protest." Northrop Grumman saying quote, "we continue to believe that Northrop Grumman offered the most modern and capable tanker for our men and women in uniform. We will review the GAO findings before commenting further."
SYLVESTER (on camera): The Air Force released a statement saying they're currently reviewing the decision. Once the review is complete, the Air Force says they will be in a decision to determine the best course of action. The pentagon must make a decision sometime within the next 60 days. Lisa Sylvester, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Well, the Government Accountability Office lived up to its name. And recommended the U.S. Air Force reopen the bidding for that multibillion dollar air refueling the tankard contract. The deal awarded to the European consortium that builds Airbus. Today's announcement a victory for Boeing. And importantly a victory for American workers as well.
One of the deal's biggest critics has been Senator Patty Murray. Senator Murray joins us tonight from Capitol Hill.
Senator, congratulations. I have to say right off the top, the General Accountability Office is an aptly named organization, actually bringing accountability to our fair nation's capital.
SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D), WASHINGTON: Absolutely. They did the job that they are required to do. And we're all proud of the work they have done. You know, I talked to you right after this happened and told you about a woman on the plant, the line, the day this decision was announced who told me that her son was flying these refueling tankers over in Iraq right now, and she built them and she could not understand why her tax dollars were going to be taken away to be build somewhere else. She's smiling tonight.
DOBBS: Let me, if I may, put up a full screen of a comment from the U.S. Air Force this afternoon, which I find fascinating. Sue Payton, the assistant secretary of the Air Force saying this, "The Air Force will do everything we can to rapidly move forward so America receives this urgently needed capability. The Air Force will select the best value tanker for our nation's defense, while being good stewards of the taxpayer dollar." Do you have any thoughts for the secretary of the Air Force? And what she considers to be the parameters for an intelligent, rational decision on the part of the Air Force?
MURRAY: The GAO was very clear that the Air Force did not follow its own rules. They misled Boeing in the contract and they didn't take into account the costs that they were supposed to. I hope this is a huge wake-up call. The GAO has sent a message to the Air Force to do this right and they now have the opportunity to get these planes built by the people who know how to build them for the best value to our taxpayers and I believe that's Boeing. I hope they move forward quickly.
DOBBS: It strikes me that we have a high-ranking Air Force official saying that they're going to be good stewards of the taxpayer dollar, is going to find value, and I don't see any discussion about the national interest of moving these contracts to the principle defense contractors right now, certainly Boeing, certainly Northrop Grumman.
Why in the world hasn't there been an effort to bring Northrop Grumman and Boeing together in this rather than separating them or permitting their separation with overseas partners? It's insane that this kind of conduct is going on.
MURRAY: Well, Boeing builds the planes, as you know now, and they have got the capability to do that. Northrop Grumman chose to partner with a foreign company. And that was their decision as well. But what I know is Boeing workers are ready to go, can build theses airplanes, can get them up in the air and that's what we she do.
DOBBS: Absolutely. And this is just a terrible, terrible contract bidding process. But again, a commendation to the General Accountability Office, to you senator, for your.
MURRAY: And Lou, your help too, because with your help, we had more than 60,000 people sign our petition that were at my back every step of the way. And my heart goes out to them tonight. My thanks as well.
DOBBS: Well, it's a decision in the best interest of the country, without question.
Thank you very much, Senator, we appreciate it.
MURRAY: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Up next, Senator Obama's broken promise, his stunning reversal, going back on his word in exchange for campaign cash. Change you can believe in, he says.
And unemployment is rising. Gasoline and food prices are rising and the president says everything is just ducky.
Wages are falling for everyone, of course, but corporate CEOs. We'll have that story.
And the prosecutor in the Ramos and Compean case accused of misconduct. I'll be talking with two of the lawmakers calling for an investigation of the U.S. attorney who led the prosecution. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) DOBBS: A stunning reversal this week from Senator Obama. Senator Obama saying now he will not accept public financing for the general election campaign. Thereby breaking a promise he made earlier. Joining me now for more on that and the week's political developments, Errol Louis, columnist, "New York Daily News" and "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT" contributor, Hank Sheinkopf, democratic strategist, also a "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT" contributor, Lisa Schiffren, "National Review" and Ken Vogel, politico.com. Thank you both for being here. Thank you very much, Earl and Hank.
Let's start with the reversal. The broken promise. I've had a number of wags suggest to me that this is a one or two-day story. We're already beating that by discussing it today. What do you think?
HANK SHEINKOPF, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: It goes to his credibility. Importantly, look at the way he dealt with it. He said, look, I need to do this because the enemy is going to beat me up. Therefore it's OK to go backwards. They're going to justify any kind of activity with that kind of rhetoric. It's not going to work for the present moment. But the real issue, Louis, is campaign finance reform a major issue to average Americans worried about $5 a gallon gas, making their mortgages and putting food on their tables in an economy that is falling apart. That's the other side of the story.
DOBBS: The other side of the story. How about the same time if you use that standard these guys could lie their way all the way to Washington?
ERROL LOUIS, "NEW YORK DAILY NEWS": Yes. Where it's been known to happen. I think probably, I agree with Hank. Look, there's a couple of chapters in the League of Women voters who are going to be so offended that they're not going to vote for the guys. I think most people are not going to focus much on this. It's not simply because it's boring or abstract to the average voter. It's because he's got a credible sort of back story. He can say, look, I brought in a million and a half contributors. The average contribution is under $200. I'm doing what reform is supposed to do. I kicked all of the federal lobbyists out of my campaign. You know, I wish every lie out of a politician's mouth or every retraction of a previous position had that much substance to it. There's at least something there. It's not simply...
DOBBS: They always had a great back story. Your views?
LISA SCHIFFREN, "NATIONAL REVIEW": You know, you can't argue with what you've said. But the fact is, he is new to America. And he's got this kind of cult following. And there is a sense of, you know, messianism about him. I always refer to him as Senator Jesus, which is a little funny. But there's some truth to the way he's being treated by his followers there. Breaking a promise like this is a big deal. It speaks to character. Is it true that people care not so much about campaign finance reform? I think that's right. I hope McCain hears that, too. But, you know, this is something he felt he was strong about in the fall. He was the one who invited John McCain to discuss how they were both going to stay within the federal spending limits. DOBBDS: All right. Ken, your thoughts.
KEN VOGEL, POLITICO: I got to disagree that this is a credible back story. I mean, it was a clear cut promise. A clear cut flip flop. And what's make it more significant was it was on an issue reducing the role of money in politics and special interest money in politics. This is something that he has embraced as a part of his change mantra. He has cited as his biggest legislative accomplishment, a bill that's passed the Senate that required the disclosure of campaign contributions bundled by lobbyists. So, this is something that is really central to both his and McCain's attempt to cast themselves as reformers. If McCain can use this flip-flop to undercut that, I think it could hurt. Obama though I do agree generally that campaign finance reform is not a huge issue compared to $4 gallon gas or the Iraq war.
DOBBS: But a broken promise is a broken promise. And when you talk about a man who says change you can believe in. He's going to start pretty clearly the kind of change he is talking about, which is at best, at the margin when you start out with a broken promise at this stage. We're going to be back with our panel. Next, we're going to be talking about, remember that gas tax holiday and how Senator Obama had the guts, the courage and principle to demonstrate that that was a hollow idea? Well, the guy who went along with that idea has staked out some pretty interesting ground on energy policy.
We'll be talking about that and a great deal more. We'll all be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBDS: We're back with Errol Louis, Hank Sheinkopf, Lisa Schiffren and Ken Vogel. Let's start with you Ken and on the panel to react to this commercial from moveon.org. I would like to hear from each of you on this. Here we go.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi, John McCain. This is Alex. And he's my first. So far his talents include trying any new food and chasing after our dog. That and making my heart pound every time I look at him. So, John McCain, when you say you would stay in Iraq for 100 years, were you counting on Alex? Because if you were, you can't have him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Wow, what do you think?
VOGEL: Well, definitely it affects a spot. And it's good for Barack Obama to have outside groups questioning John McCain's judgment on the war in Iraq because this is an issue that works well for democrats but it's one that if Obama himself were to go after McCain on, it could lend credence to or give an opening for republicans to question Obama's judgment and experience on foreign policy and military affairs where he clearly is at a disadvantage to John McCain. DOBBS: Lisa.
SCHIFFREN: You know, as a mom I think commercials that exploit moms and babies like that are so over the top and melodramatic that they may undercut themselves a little. That one has got a lot of negative. I don't think that hits people emotionally. I think you laugh at that commercial.
LOUIS: I tend to agree. In part because I have a young child as well. The ad itself, I think it was preaching to the choir. The moveon.org crowd who hated the war, hated this administration are not going anywhere near John McCain. This is to get their juices flowing. Is it going to convince undecided voters? I think most Americans know what they think about Iraq at this point. I don't think this ad is going to push anybody at any direction at all.
DOBBS: Hank.
SHEINKOPF: This is called a soccer punch. Get McCain into a discussion on what he said or didn't say and then hope that he reacts and you can have a discussion on your terms on what you want to say. McCain's best move is to try to make it appear in a public place, make a statement that turns that commercial. Is it effective? To those who as I said are already convinced, it will be very effective. To those of us who say, wait a second, it's much less effective.
VOGEL: I disagree. I think keeping Iraq out front is something that works well for democrats and works well for Obama. And again, it helps to have an outside group doing it as opposed to the candidate himself.
SHEINKOPF: I'm not saying keep Iraq out front. I'm saying something else. McCain has to figure out a way to get rid of that fast.
SCHIFFREN: I think McCain has to actually get back to his point. That staying in Iraq can be like staying in South Korea or Japan that a military occupation over the long run to maintain peace --
DOBBS: The media has gone so into the tank for Barack Obama that that ad right there is a distortion of what Senator McCain said.
LOUIS: It's not only a distortion of what he said. I mean, he's got answers to that.
DOBBS: Absolutely.
LOUIS: I mean, that young kid -
DOBBS: This is and I got to say it. And I really want to understand how political reporters covering this campaign don't have either the intellectual integrity or the guts to say that that kind of ad is absolutely hogwash and has no place in a campaign. Because if, you know, on the democratic side if you're upset about swift vote, this kind of nonsense is an insult to everybody's intelligence.
LOUIS: Well, it assumes this quote that has been taken out of context about how -
DOBBS: Out of context. And the national media is obliging, by the way.
LOUIS: That I find striking about is when that kid turns 18, he's going to make his own decision. And there is plenty out there.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Here's another part of the story, the young child there. There in lies one of the great great, to me, issues in this society of ours. Why are we not sharing the burden of these conflicts? Why are we not sacrificing for these complex because that woman there trying to influence her son one way or the other will probably have the determined position. Because we are a volunteer army and a volunteer military. We should be sharing, in my opinion, these burdens and nothing highlights it more than that super silly ad on the political campaign between these who I question if either one has the stuff to be president. I got that out. I just couldn't hold it in anymore. I do. I think the rest of the country is going to feel better about it, too. We get to do this for five more months. All right. Thank you very much, Errol. Thank you, Lisa. Thank you. Ken, good to have you with us.
VOGEL: Great to be right there.
DOBBS: Up next, new developments in the case of border control agents, Ramos and Compean and the man who led their prosecution is right now being accused of prosecutorial misconduct. Gasoline prices rising. Well, guess what, so is CEO's pay. Don't you feel better. We'll have that stories here next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Several members of congress are now demanding a federal investigation into U.S. attorney Johnny Sutton's prosecution of former border patrol agents, Ramos and Compean. Compean and Ramos are serving lengthy prison sentences for shooting and wounding an illegal alien drug smuggler from Mexico back in 2005. The lawmaker say Sutton is guilty of prosecutorial misconduct because he prosecuted the two agents for a crime that doesn't exist.
Joining me now, two of the lawmakers who are pushing that effort, Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina. Congressman, good to have you with us.
REP. WALTER JONES, NORTH CAROLINA: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: Congressman Ted Poe of Texas, joining us from Capitol Hill. Congressman, good to have you with us.
REP. TED POE, TEXAS: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: All right. Here is what your letter states in part, "the United States attorney Sutton secured an indictment charging Mr. Ramos and Mr. Compean with a nonexistent crime of "discharging" a firearm "in relation to a crime of violence." The charge for it an automatic 10-year sentence has on the court several fact rule that discharge be considered by a judge for sentencing after a conviction?
POE: No question about it. The discharging requirement is something the judge considers on measurement only, and that allows the judge to impose a ten-year additional sentence to the original crime. And so the supreme court and the lower courts have already ruled that discharging a firearm in the commission of a crime is not a crime. They rewarded the indictment improperly. And doing so, charged him with a crime that does not exist under our statutes. Therefore, they've committed, in my opinion, prosecutorial misconduct.
DOBBS: And also within the letter, "Mr. Sutton, you say, has manipulated the federal criminal code to obtain conviction against two U.S. border patrol agents, preferring to win at all costs over his duty as a United States Attorney." How did he manipulate the federal criminal code?
POE: One way was to not allow the judge to make that decision, but demanding that the jury make that decision, Lou. And also the prosecutors offered the defendants a plea bargain, and because the defendants maintained their innocence and wanted to go to trial, they were punished for exercising their right as citizens to be tried, and they added the charge of discharging a firearm so that they would get an additional ten years.
JONES: Lou, let me also say we fought the last two years, have been talking to the attorneys for Compean and Ramos and many other people who are legal experts, just like my friend, Ted Poe. And when you look at how the case was prosecuted, there is obviously legitimate question as to how this even proceeded, quite frankly.
DOBBDS: We're talking about now over six months since that appeal was filed. No movement at all from the appellate court on this case. Are you troubled by that, Congressman?
POE: It's unusual for the fifth circuit to take this long to make a decision. But I think the length of time is to the advantage of the defendants. Back in December, December 3rd, one of the justices really thought raked the prosecution over the cause, thought they had overreached in the prosecution of this case. But it has taken a long time. I think though the results will be good when they finally make their decision.
JONES: Lou, if I can, very quickly tell you that Chairman John (inaudible) of the judiciary committee is seriously looking at holding hearings about this case itself as we come back on the July 4th break
DOBBDS: Well, that's encouraging. We talked with U.S. attorney's Johnny Sutton's office for reaction to both your letter and what's going on with the appellate court. Here's what his office said, "the assertions made in the Congressmen's letter about the sufficiency of the indictment charging Compean and Ramos with a firearm violation have been briefing and argues in the 5th Circuit court of Appeals. I welcome the Court's resolution of this and the other issues raised on appeal." What are we dealing with here? This is - this is pretty raw stuff by any standard. To have two law enforcement agents treated this way. A federal prosecutor to simply run rampant over the facts here, to give immunity and to hide from the court and from the jury most importantly. The fact that that immunized illegal alien drug smuggler was a career criminal who had just committed another crime while under that immunity. I mean, this is nasty, nasty stuff.
POE: There are a lot of issues in this case where it seems to me that the prosecution was relentless in making sure that they had a conviction. The duty under the law for a prosecutor is to seek justice. And justice in this case was not sought by the prosecution, but a conviction. And so we want this aired out in the legal community to see whether or not the prosecutor's office was engaged in misconduct under our laws.
DOBBS: What do you think the odds are Congressmen that the U.S. attorney will even honor your letter with a response?
JONES: Lou, I am encouraged because I will tell you the truth. Thanks to you, and many people like yourself, this is a national issue. A national concern. And I believe the Justice Department will take this request by those of us in Congress seriously. I really do.
DOBBS: Let's hope so. We thank you very much, Congressman Jones, Congressman Poe. Thank you both for being here.
JONES: All right. Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: Coming up next, the war on the middle class is escalating. Neither presidential candidate has real solutions or apparently even a clue. I'll be joined by three economists here next. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Well CEO's salaries continue to rise to outrageous heights despite a sluggish economy and certainly tepid if not outright stagnant wage increases for working people. An Associated Press survey of the top 500 companies in the country revealing the median pay package for a CEO is just $8.4 million. That's up almost $300,000 over the previous year. Collectively, the ten highest paid CEOs made more than $500,000,000 last year. Not a bad year and half of those CEOs lead companies with profits that were plunging. While America's CEO pay is certainly no problem, our middle class is working harder and longer for less.
I'm joined now with three of the country's brightest economic minds. Bruce Bartlett is a former deputy assistant secretary for economic policy for Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush and Steven Greenhouse, labor and work place correspondent for the "New York Times" and author of the important new book "The Big Squeeze: Tough Times for the American Worker," and Peter Morici, professor at the University of Maryland Robert H. Smith's School for Business. Good to have you all here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good to be with you. DOBBS: Let's start here, Steven, with you. 5.5 percent unemployment. The biggest move in unemployment in over a decade and a half in one month, the unemployment rate. We've got gas prices as everybody know is skyrocketing. We have got food prices skyrocketing. Basic commodities skyrocketing. Aren't you - don't you feel well that, don't you feel much, much comfort to know that CEO pays moving up smartly.
STEVEN GREENHOUSE, AUTHOR "THE BIG SQUEEZE": I wonder how CEOs have the gull to continue doing this at a time when, you know, they're laying off people, profits are going down, we're seeing the market take a beating in many ways. And I guess they want to keep up with their peers. And then they see all these other CEOs making $10 million and they want to make $10 million.
DOBBS: Working people, where are they - where do they turn here? What in - because neither of these politicians seeking the highest office in the land is offering a single real solution?
GREENHOUSE: I think American voters are really looking for change. They're seeing the economy not do very well. They're tired of wages being flat. They're seeing health benefits get worse. They're seeing pension benefits get worse. They're working harder, and they want change. And they're hoping Obama or McCain will deliver for them. And they're looking really hard to see that something happens.
DOBBS: Well, Bruce do you think that they should put much stock in either of these candidates for change?
BRUCE BARTLETT, FMR. TREASURY DEPT. ECONOMIST: Well, by definition we'll get some kind of change next year. Because we're finally, we're going to have a new president. But based on what the two candidates have said so far about the economy, I don't see any meaningful change. I mean, it's sort of around the edge.
DOBBS: We hear all these blabber about change. I for the life of me can't figure out where the change would be. I really cannot.
BARTLETT: Again, based on what they've said so far, I don't see -
DOBBS: By the way, I'm referring to both candidates, which I think is about as perfectly matched as two could possibly be. I don't mean that in the most flattering way either, Bruce.
BARTLETT: Well, I agree with you. I think, I mean, because the problem is, in my opinion, the biggest problem we have facing this country is our fiscal situation. It's just completely out of control. And I think it's actually responsible for a lot of the problems that you're worried about, such as the trade deficit. But the democrats don't want to talk about cutting entitlement programs. And the republicans don't want to talk about raising taxes. And they're both just absolutely scared that if they say anything that would hurt anybody in the tiniest, tiniest way, they'll be just destroyed at the polls.
DOBBS: They're lying through their teeth is what you're saying, both parties. Because they -
BARTLETT: Implicitly. Absolutely.
DOBBS: Professors, sort it out for us.
PROF. PETER MORICI, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: Well, choosing between McCain and Obama is like MasterCard and Visa. To me the big problem is trade and oil. And on oil neither one of them is going to do much, you know, oil imports. And on trade, Obama is basically campaigning on the Clinton platform of his first term. He's going to do something about NAFTA. Once he gets elected, he won't. He says he's going to do something about China. But he's very vague. So I don't see hope with real change with Obama. And McCain has already promised to give us the sixth term of the Reagan administration. So, I don't see much here going on.
DOBBS: This idea of free trade. I mean, McCain talking about he's going to be a free trader. Bragging about it. 32 consecutive years of trade deficits. He's talking as if, you know, he's, you know, staving off the dragons of protectionism. When what he is really doing is resisting empirical data and absolute physical evidence of a wrong headed policy that's costing millions of jobs and doing absolutely nothing to drive this economy.
MORICI: By my math, the manufacturing sector during the time of George Bush has lost 2 million jobs because of the trade deficit with China and in the rest of Asia. I would like to know how either of these two candidates are going to get that back, or what they're going to do to assist our ailing automobile sector. And what they're going to do by our $425 billion trade deficit on oil which is not coming back in the form of purchased goods but rather it comes back in the form of the gulf states hauling off the Chrysler building in CSX. The whole situation is absurd.
DOBBS: Steve, your thoughts?
GREENHOUSE: I agree with a lot of what Peter is saying. I think it's a disaster we lost so many manufacturing jobs since 2000. We lost one in five manufacturing jobs. 3.5 million jobs. And as you know, Lou, they're losing very good middle class jobs of good wages.
DOBBS: This includes 3 million jobs lost to outsourcing to cheaper- perceived labor markets.
GREENHOUSE: Yes. We're just talking blue collar factory jobs. It's predicted we'll lose three to four million white-collar jobs, accounting jobs, engineering jobs, overseas, over a decade as well. And I often think that there's been benign neglect of the manufacturing sector in recent years. The administration has worked very hard in helping the oil industry, but not paying much attention to, you know, manufacturing industries of the midwest.
DOBBS: This administration I could be a little more direct. This administration has sold the country out on every level. And we continue to do so on any basis that it possibly could. We have $53 trillion in unfunded liabilities. We have a $6.5 trillion trade def that's rising faster than our $9.5 trillion debt. We have neither candidates speaking responsibly about entitlements as you suggested, Bruce. We have neither candidate talking intelligently about healthcare, about energy, of what kind of atmosphere they're going to create for working men and women in this country that is for the middle class. It's insane that we are taking these two preposterous pretenders seriously. Don't you think? We'll test your partisanship here, Steven?
GREENHOUSE: I think both candidates are trying within the limits of the party to try to move things forward.
DOBBS: The limits of the parties?
Peter, thank you very much. Bruce, thank you very much. Steve, thank you for being here. Come back soon.
Thanks for joining us. Join us here tomorrow and please join me on the radio, Monday through Friday for the "Lou Dobbs Show". Go to loudobbsradio.com to get your local listings for the "Lou Dobbs Show." For all of us, thanks for watching. Good night from New York.
