Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
Ruling Issued in Rush Limbaugh's Medical Records Case; Dems React to Bush; Kerry Campaign
Aired October 06, 2004 - 11:10 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We've been listening into, President Bush. He's speaking in Wilkesbury, Pennsylvania making a campaign stop there, trying to draw the differences as he sees it between him and John Kerry. Looking at the difference, as he sees it, on their position on taxes, healthcare and mainly on Homeland Security and defending America both here and abroad.
And he said that he believes the path to safety is the path of action. He tried to paint a picture of Senator Kerry as having a different view on that.
Our Bill Schneider, senior political analyst has been listening in with us as well.
Bill, this was billed as this administration as this camp -- by this campaign as a major speech. It was very impassioned, very energized, a very welcoming crowd. I don't think I really heard anything new, however, in the speech.
BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Not a lot that was new. He did give another version of the justification of the war in Iraq. He said, "We could not take the risk of Saddam Hussein passing information and weapons to a terrorist network. That's a risk the United States could not afford to take." I haven't heard that quite that justification before.
He also attacked Senator Kerry who said that the war in Iraq was a mistake. President Bush said, "You can't win a war that you don't believe in fighting." And he even made a joke about why he made a face in the debate last week. He said, "I couldn't hear all those things from Senator Kerry." You understand why I had to -- why somebody would make a face when he heard what Senator Kerry was saying.
This was clearly a campaign speech, and it was an effort to give a different or a more accomplished presentation than he was able to give in that debate last week. And we'll presumably hear from Senator Kerry at some point, his explanation of what happened what Bushed in that debate.
KAGAN: All right. Bill Schneider, thanks for staying around and listening in with us.
By the way, for our Democratic viewers, in a few moments I'll be talking with Jane Harmon representative from Southern California on how she might have a different take about what President Bush had to say.
Meanwhile, as we were listening in to President Bush, some breaking news from Florida. And for more on that let's go to my colleague Kyra Phillips -- Kyra.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Daryn, thank you so much. We're going to go to Florida now, where there's been a ruling in the Rush Limbaugh case. You may recall the radio talk show host took on the state of Florida after officials there seized some of his medical records.
CNN's John Zarrella brings us up to speed now on what's happening from Miami.
Hi, John.
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Kyra. Well, you know, it's been almost six months since the Fourth District Court of Appeals was asked by Rush Limbaugh and his attorneys to decide whether the state of Florida had legally seized his records by using a search warrant, as opposed to using a subpoena. Limbaugh's attorney had argued that no one had the right to pry into his medical history, that it was a fishing expedition, that it was an invasion of privacy.
Well, today, finally the District Court ruled, quote, "We conclude that the state's authority to seize such records by a validly issued search warrant is not affected by any right of privacy in such records." So, the seizure then, legal, according to the State Appeals Court.
Susan Candiotti, CNN's Susan Candiotti now takes a look at how we got to where we are today.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I can't believe I'm talking to you.
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Rush Limbaugh's nightmare began last fall. His former housekeeper sold a blockbuster story to the "National Enquirer." Wilma Klein claims she illegally sold the popular conservative talk show host thousands of prescription painkillers including oxycontin and hydrocodon.
RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I really don't know the full scope of what I'm dealing with.
CANDIOTTI: A week later, Limbaugh admitted a problem.
LIMBAUGH: I am addicted to prescription pain medication.
CANDIOTTI: With that, Limbaugh left the air for a month of treatment. He blamed unrelenting pain from spinal surgery years earlier. He claimed his former employee tried to blackmail him, and said he paid her what he called "extortion money" but was afraid to go to authorities. Last December, investigators raided Limbaugh's doctors' offices in Florida and California. In search warrants, prosecutors said Limbaugh was part of an ongoing investigation that began a year earlier and appeared to be doctor-shopping for painkillers, going from doctor to doctor to get more pills.
Authorities said pharmacy records showed Limbaugh obtained more than 2,000 pills over a six-month period. Limbaugh and his lawyers cried foul.
LIMBAUGH: Rush Limbaugh is not part of a drug ring. Rush Limbaugh was never a target of a drug investigation.
CANDIOTTI: Limbaugh claims local prosecutors are unfairly targeting him, compared to others in similar predicaments. He says his constitutional right to privacy was violated by the raid. And later, the ACLU joined his appeal. On the air, he also suggested Democrats were to blame.
LIMBAUGH: The Democrats in this country still cannot defeat me in the arena of political ideas. And so now, they are trying to do so in the court of public opinion and the legal system.
CANDIOTTI: Prosecutor defended the search warrant.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Has it now been reduced to we have to notice the target of an investigation, that we want to look at the evidence that a felony is committed?
CANDIOTTI: The day after the raid, Limbaugh went to court and got the doctors' record sealed. But behind the scenes last December, Limbaugh's lawyers wrote to prosecutors arguing Limbaugh is an addict, not a criminal. They asked for a pre-trial intervention to drop the case if Limbaugh completes a drug rehab program. The offer was rejected. Prosecutors claimed they have evidence indicating more than 10 felony counts. They suggested probation in exchange for copping a plea of one charge of doctor shopping. Limbaugh refused.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They want to embarrass him and disgrace him and discredit him.
CANDIOTTI: For months, an appeals court mauled the legality of the search warrants. All of the while, Limbaugh's records have remained sealed and no charges have been filed.
Susan Candiotti, CNN, Miami.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZARRELLA: Now, when Limbaugh's attorneys went to the appeals court they argued, of course, that it should have been a subpoena that was used. not the search warrant because that violated his privacy. They said a subpoena would have allowed them time to then go to court to try to block the seizure of his records. The state argued in court well, if you do that and allow that -- and don't allow us to use a search warrant, then we're notifying somebody up front and the records could be destroyed.
Now, the court did give some leeway to Limbaugh. It wrote in its final conclusion that they denied the writ. But "Our denial, however is without prejudice to petitioner to seek review by the issuing judge, to ensure that all of the records produced fall within the scope of the warrants. And to seek other protective relief to prevent the improper disclosure to third parties of records irrelevant to this prosecution."
So we will have to see, Kyra, where this goes here. But clearly, it appears as if it was a victory for the state of Florida in its case against Rush Limbaugh -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: So, John, real quickly. Is Rush Limbaugh still under investigation in any manner, for example, doctor shopping?
ZARRELLA: No. I mean in fact, no criminal charges have ever been brought against Mr. Limbaugh. And right now, everything is on hold, the records have been sealed. And now it's up to the state to decide where it wants to go if it will continue with possibly a prosecution. And Mr. Limbaugh, on the other hand, to decide whether they are going to appeal this ruling.
So that's where it stands right now. Again, no charges have been filed against Mr. Limbaugh.
PHILLIPS: All right. John Zarrella...
ZARRELLA: The investigation -- I mean the investigation is under way but no charges filed -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: John Zarrella, live from Miami, thank you so much.
We have Jeffrey Toobin now on the phone
With us, our legal analyst. First of all, Jeffrey, do you think there will be an appeal?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: They have fought this every step of the way and it seems likely that Limbaugh's lawyers will go to the state Supreme Court.
PHILLIPS: So, is it possible that those records will be made public, and that we could actually see where on those records in detail? and how devastating could that be?
TOOBIN: I think it's unlikely that they will be made public, unless there is a criminal trial of Limbaugh, unless several steps take place. The records are turned over to prosecutor. Prosecutors charge him. There's no plea bargain and there is then a public trial of Limbaugh. That's a lot of steps that have yet to take place. Simply turning them over to prosecutors will not result in their being made public.
So even if Limbaugh loses this lawsuit, it doesn't mean that he will -- that the records will be made public immediately or even ever. PHILLIPS: And as John Zarrella said no charges have been filed, there appears to be no investigation under way. So could this be the end of this story?
TOOBIN: Actually, I don't think so. I think there's no -- the investigation is very much still alive, according to my information. and it was very -- it was on hold pending this lawsuit. So I think Rush Limbaugh is by no means out of the woods. In fact, he is deeper into the woods because of this decision. Whether there will be a prosecution, whether the charges will actually be filed, I can't say. But certainly, this decision will put new life into the investigation.
PHILLIPS: All right, so finally now, this decision that has gone forward, what are the state's options?
TOOBIN: Well, the state has won. The state will get the documents unless Rush Limbaugh gets another court to intervene. So the state will get these records that it seized from his doctor and then will determine whether these are evidence -- the documents are evidence of a crime committed by Rush Limbaugh or someone else.
PHILLIPS: But now the state has to make that decision, though, right, Jeffrey?
TOOBIN: Sorry?
PHILLIPS: Now the state has to make a decision, though, of what to do about these records, correct?
TOOBIN: Right. They have to examine them. Their investigators will examine them and determine whether they justify prosecuting Limbaugh or anyone else.
PHILLIPS: All right. Jeffrey Toobin, our legal analyst. Thank you so much. It can be a little bit confusing.
Once again, if you're just tuning in, the court of appeal did back the seizure of Rush Limbaugh's medical records. The state acted correctly when it seized Rush Limbaugh's medical records. That's according to the fourth district court of appeal. Also going on to say the seizure did not affect his right to privacy.
Once again, also want to maintain that Limbaugh has not been charged in an investigation and maintains that he has done nothing illegal. We'll continue to follow, of course, this story throughout the day -- Daryn.
KAGAN: All right. Kyra, thank you very much.
We will take a break and we're back after this with much more news.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: All right. Let's back to news from the campaign trail. Democrats responding after President Bush goes on the offensive this morning. In a speech from Pennsylvania that just wrapped up -- you saw it live here on CNN -- the president sharpened his attack on Senator John Kerry over the war in Iraq and the economy.
Representative Jane Harman, a Democrat from southern California, joins me from Capitol Hill to respond to the president's speech.
Congresswoman, good morning. Thanks for being here with me.
REP. JANE HARMAN (D), CALIFORNIA: Good morning.
KAGAN: Let's get right to some of the points that President Bush was making, trying to differentiate what a vote for him would be compared to a vote for John Kerry. I guess in some ways that's one thing you can agree with on the president -- with the president.
HARMAN: Well, I agree that he was trying to get votes. I disagree that he was effective in differentiating himself from some of the good ideas that John Kerry has put forward. In fact, I would call it his Mulligan speech. This is his attempt at a second shot to tell America what he failed to tell America in his debate with John Kerry, and I think this shot also fell far short.
KAGAN: OK. Let's go over some of the points that President Bush made to the audience in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. First of all, he hit hared on taxes, saying he is a president that has lowered taxes. And he said John Kerry is somebody who has voted a number of times to raise taxes.
HARMAN: Well, he's accusing of Kerry to roll back some prospective tax increases which are leading us to this incredible $8 trillion in debt, the swing from when Bush took office, and huge, huge, massive deficits each year. And so I don't call that a tax increase. I call that a responsible fiscal policy, which this administration has not been for.
KAGAN: The biggest chunk of the speech talking about homeland defense, about the war on terror.
HARMAN: Right.
KAGAN: This president saying that he decided after September 1 that he couldn't take any chances, that "the best ways to safety for America is a path to action." And he says that John Kerry has a theory of September 10, that he's living in a September 10 world. What would you say to that?
HARMAN: Yes, I heard that, the September 10 mindset. That was the mindset of the administration before September 11, not looking forward the way I thought the late Clinton years did, and those of us who served on commissions on terror, which I did. But here is really the point.
There are huge mistakes on this president's watch in the war on terror. Just to list a few this week, we now know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We now know that there was no al Qaeda-Saddam Hussein connection. We now know that our European allies wanted to commit troops before they were mortally offended by the rhetoric and actions of this administration.
None of those things were addressed by the president today. There are two Americas. There's the one in the minds of these White House advisers, and then there's the reality on the ground. And I think Americans understand, as John Edwards said effectively last night, that things are not going well in Iraq, and we need someone who will face that level with the American people, tell them the truth, and then change these failed policies.
KAGAN: And then, finally, the president was trying to mark a difference between where he puts America versus the rest of the world. He was suggesting that John Kerry would put the opinion of an international criminal court above what would be taking place and what would be demands from here in America. What would you say to that?
HARMAN: No one is arguing, John Kerry is not arguing that the actions of our soldiers, consistent with international conventions on war, would go before the international criminal court. No one has ever argued that.
That is just a strawman, as they say. And this president is trying to skewer some of the statements of John Kerry.
It's an election. Many of us who have been through tough elections understand this, but I think the American people are seeing through these excellent 90-minute debates the difference between the Democratic candidates for president and vice president, who want to level with the American people and tell them the truth, and this fantasy administration.
KAGAN: Representative Jane Harman from Capitol Hill.
HARMAN: Thank you.
KAGAN: Thank you for your time, for giving us a different take from what we heard from President Bush. Thank you so much, Congresswoman. Appreciate that.
Well, the senator will be able to speak for himself. He is in Colorado today. He's staying out of the spotlight, getting ready for Friday night's debate. Our national correspondent, Frank Buckley, is with the Kerry campaign, joining us from Englewood, Colorado.
Good morning.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey there, Daryn.
The Kerry campaign thought it was effective to get Senator Kerry off the campaign trail for the first debate, the foreign policy debate last week, and allowed him to clear his head and to focus on the issues that were expected to come up at the debate. So they're doing it again here, leading up to this debate coming up on Friday.
Senator Kerry arriving here in the Denver, Colorado, area yesterday afternoon to an airport rally. This state, Colorado, one that went to President Bush in 2000 by eight points, but it's one that Democrats believe they have a shot at this year. They're spending money here and they're spending time here.
Senator Kerry was here last night to watch the debate. He watched it in his hotel suite with his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, who's celebrating her birthday. After the debate, Senator Kerry called his running mate, Senator John Edwards, for the benefit of the assembled pool of journalists, and engaged in his own post-debate spin during the phone call.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It helped. But I have to tell you, you know, the country saw the clarity, the country sees the choice.
He had no answer about Halliburton. He had no answer about, you know, taking care of the drug companies and the other companies. He has no answer about the unfairness of their taxes. And he was incorrect in the facts that he kept putting out.
So we're going to have a terrific opportunity just to continue to talk about the truth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BUCKLEY: And the Kerry campaign did its best to soften the blow of one of Vice President Dick Cheney's best zingers of the night, when Vice President Cheney suggested that Senator Edwards had a terrible attendance record in the U.S. Senate, saying that as Senate president he'd never met John Edwards.
Well, soon after that, the Kerry campaign released a grainy still photo, a video grab from a C-SPAN coverage of a 2001 prayer breakfast in which you can clearly see Senator Edwards and Vice President Cheney together. They also released excerpts of Vice President's Cheney's remarks at that breakfast in which Vice President Cheney thanked Senator Edwards for his appearance. So that was some of the reaction to the debate last night.
Meanwhile, today, Senator Kerry continues with his debate preparations here. We are told that, once again, Greg Craig, who was one of President Clinton's attorneys during the impeachment process, is going to be playing the role of President Bush -- Daryn.
KAGAN: Frank Buckley in Englewood, Colorado, thank you for that.
To our viewers, stay with CNN for extensive coverage on the second presidential debate. It will be live from St. Louis. CNN's coverage begins at 7:00 Eastern, 4:00 Pacific.
The U.S. military says it has good news coming from Iraq, but it comes at a heavy cost to a lot of civilians, civilians it says are used to -- that are being used as shields. That is coming up next.
Also, the CIA's final report on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, it's out, and the critics might already be saying, "Told you so." And later, before the flu hits America, the fear may be. We'll have the latest on a development that is stopping much of the flu vaccine.
CNN LIVE TODAY is back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: Checking developments in Iraq. A car bomb at a National Guard camp in northwestern Iraq went off today. Twelve guard members were killed in the town of Ana (ph), on the Euphrates River near the border with Syria.
The U.S. military says the crackdown against insurgents in Samarra has been very successful. Officials say militants have been defeated and the city is returning to normal. The U.S. says 127 insurgents and 20 civilians were killed in the crackdown.
A long-awaited report on Iraq's arms programs goes to Congress today. It will conclude what has become obvious: Iraq did not have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Let's bring in national security correspondent David Ensor.
David, good morning.
DAVID ENSOR, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.
As you say, this report, a thousand-plus pages, will land with a loud thump on a lot of desks in Washington later this afternoon. And it is liable to have an impact on the political season as ammunition for both sides.
It was authored by Charles Duelfer, the CIA's top man looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He was a former U.N. arms inspector, someone who spent much of his life on this topic. Kind of a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) on the issue, really knows the details.
The headline, as you say, is that the report finds that there are no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction inside Iraq. And it says that there's no evidence that illicit weapons programs with military implications, in other words, large amounts, were restarted by Saddam Hussein after 1991.
That's ammunition for the opponents of President Bush. There's also some ammunition for his supporters.
The report goes on to say that Saddam Hussein intended to restart his WMD program and that there's plenty of evidence of that. And the -- and the report, we are told, will name companies that defied U.N. sanctions, including American, French, Russian and Polish companies, although in the public version of the report, the American names will be left out because the privacy act doesn't allow them to be put in. However, we understand that the congressmen will have those names, so chances are we'll hear about them. The report also will say, we are told by officials who have seen it, that Saddam, in the interrogation of Saddam, he has said that the reason he wanted to keep WMD program alive or keep the possibility alive so devotedly was because he thought they had helped him twice very importantly. Once, that he believes they stopped the U.S. from marching on Baghdad back in 1991, when you'll recall the first President Bush decided to take back Kuwait, but go no further.
And secondly, he says that, of course, the massive use of Iraqi chemical weapons against Iran in the Iran-Iraq war, in his belief, prevented Iran from winning that war. So the dictator had good reasons for believing that WMD was something that was important to him.
Now, the report is being described as a comprehensive one. And, as I said, it's over a thousand pages.
We understand that Duelfer will avoid the word "final," final report, because there still are some loose ends to wrap up. I mean, for example, there are 900 linguists, we are told, in a facility in Qatar who are still going through Arabic language documents having to do with WMD, though officials say they don't believe anything will be found in those documents that will substantially change the findings that will be announced today -- Daryn.
KAGAN: David Ensor, thank you for the latest on that report. Looking forward to more later.
Coming up next, we're going to look back at the vice presidential debate. Who do you think won last night's debate? We will show you what the polls are saying, coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired October 6, 2004 - 11:10 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We've been listening into, President Bush. He's speaking in Wilkesbury, Pennsylvania making a campaign stop there, trying to draw the differences as he sees it between him and John Kerry. Looking at the difference, as he sees it, on their position on taxes, healthcare and mainly on Homeland Security and defending America both here and abroad.
And he said that he believes the path to safety is the path of action. He tried to paint a picture of Senator Kerry as having a different view on that.
Our Bill Schneider, senior political analyst has been listening in with us as well.
Bill, this was billed as this administration as this camp -- by this campaign as a major speech. It was very impassioned, very energized, a very welcoming crowd. I don't think I really heard anything new, however, in the speech.
BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Not a lot that was new. He did give another version of the justification of the war in Iraq. He said, "We could not take the risk of Saddam Hussein passing information and weapons to a terrorist network. That's a risk the United States could not afford to take." I haven't heard that quite that justification before.
He also attacked Senator Kerry who said that the war in Iraq was a mistake. President Bush said, "You can't win a war that you don't believe in fighting." And he even made a joke about why he made a face in the debate last week. He said, "I couldn't hear all those things from Senator Kerry." You understand why I had to -- why somebody would make a face when he heard what Senator Kerry was saying.
This was clearly a campaign speech, and it was an effort to give a different or a more accomplished presentation than he was able to give in that debate last week. And we'll presumably hear from Senator Kerry at some point, his explanation of what happened what Bushed in that debate.
KAGAN: All right. Bill Schneider, thanks for staying around and listening in with us.
By the way, for our Democratic viewers, in a few moments I'll be talking with Jane Harmon representative from Southern California on how she might have a different take about what President Bush had to say.
Meanwhile, as we were listening in to President Bush, some breaking news from Florida. And for more on that let's go to my colleague Kyra Phillips -- Kyra.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Daryn, thank you so much. We're going to go to Florida now, where there's been a ruling in the Rush Limbaugh case. You may recall the radio talk show host took on the state of Florida after officials there seized some of his medical records.
CNN's John Zarrella brings us up to speed now on what's happening from Miami.
Hi, John.
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Kyra. Well, you know, it's been almost six months since the Fourth District Court of Appeals was asked by Rush Limbaugh and his attorneys to decide whether the state of Florida had legally seized his records by using a search warrant, as opposed to using a subpoena. Limbaugh's attorney had argued that no one had the right to pry into his medical history, that it was a fishing expedition, that it was an invasion of privacy.
Well, today, finally the District Court ruled, quote, "We conclude that the state's authority to seize such records by a validly issued search warrant is not affected by any right of privacy in such records." So, the seizure then, legal, according to the State Appeals Court.
Susan Candiotti, CNN's Susan Candiotti now takes a look at how we got to where we are today.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I can't believe I'm talking to you.
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Rush Limbaugh's nightmare began last fall. His former housekeeper sold a blockbuster story to the "National Enquirer." Wilma Klein claims she illegally sold the popular conservative talk show host thousands of prescription painkillers including oxycontin and hydrocodon.
RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I really don't know the full scope of what I'm dealing with.
CANDIOTTI: A week later, Limbaugh admitted a problem.
LIMBAUGH: I am addicted to prescription pain medication.
CANDIOTTI: With that, Limbaugh left the air for a month of treatment. He blamed unrelenting pain from spinal surgery years earlier. He claimed his former employee tried to blackmail him, and said he paid her what he called "extortion money" but was afraid to go to authorities. Last December, investigators raided Limbaugh's doctors' offices in Florida and California. In search warrants, prosecutors said Limbaugh was part of an ongoing investigation that began a year earlier and appeared to be doctor-shopping for painkillers, going from doctor to doctor to get more pills.
Authorities said pharmacy records showed Limbaugh obtained more than 2,000 pills over a six-month period. Limbaugh and his lawyers cried foul.
LIMBAUGH: Rush Limbaugh is not part of a drug ring. Rush Limbaugh was never a target of a drug investigation.
CANDIOTTI: Limbaugh claims local prosecutors are unfairly targeting him, compared to others in similar predicaments. He says his constitutional right to privacy was violated by the raid. And later, the ACLU joined his appeal. On the air, he also suggested Democrats were to blame.
LIMBAUGH: The Democrats in this country still cannot defeat me in the arena of political ideas. And so now, they are trying to do so in the court of public opinion and the legal system.
CANDIOTTI: Prosecutor defended the search warrant.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Has it now been reduced to we have to notice the target of an investigation, that we want to look at the evidence that a felony is committed?
CANDIOTTI: The day after the raid, Limbaugh went to court and got the doctors' record sealed. But behind the scenes last December, Limbaugh's lawyers wrote to prosecutors arguing Limbaugh is an addict, not a criminal. They asked for a pre-trial intervention to drop the case if Limbaugh completes a drug rehab program. The offer was rejected. Prosecutors claimed they have evidence indicating more than 10 felony counts. They suggested probation in exchange for copping a plea of one charge of doctor shopping. Limbaugh refused.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They want to embarrass him and disgrace him and discredit him.
CANDIOTTI: For months, an appeals court mauled the legality of the search warrants. All of the while, Limbaugh's records have remained sealed and no charges have been filed.
Susan Candiotti, CNN, Miami.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZARRELLA: Now, when Limbaugh's attorneys went to the appeals court they argued, of course, that it should have been a subpoena that was used. not the search warrant because that violated his privacy. They said a subpoena would have allowed them time to then go to court to try to block the seizure of his records. The state argued in court well, if you do that and allow that -- and don't allow us to use a search warrant, then we're notifying somebody up front and the records could be destroyed.
Now, the court did give some leeway to Limbaugh. It wrote in its final conclusion that they denied the writ. But "Our denial, however is without prejudice to petitioner to seek review by the issuing judge, to ensure that all of the records produced fall within the scope of the warrants. And to seek other protective relief to prevent the improper disclosure to third parties of records irrelevant to this prosecution."
So we will have to see, Kyra, where this goes here. But clearly, it appears as if it was a victory for the state of Florida in its case against Rush Limbaugh -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: So, John, real quickly. Is Rush Limbaugh still under investigation in any manner, for example, doctor shopping?
ZARRELLA: No. I mean in fact, no criminal charges have ever been brought against Mr. Limbaugh. And right now, everything is on hold, the records have been sealed. And now it's up to the state to decide where it wants to go if it will continue with possibly a prosecution. And Mr. Limbaugh, on the other hand, to decide whether they are going to appeal this ruling.
So that's where it stands right now. Again, no charges have been filed against Mr. Limbaugh.
PHILLIPS: All right. John Zarrella...
ZARRELLA: The investigation -- I mean the investigation is under way but no charges filed -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: John Zarrella, live from Miami, thank you so much.
We have Jeffrey Toobin now on the phone
With us, our legal analyst. First of all, Jeffrey, do you think there will be an appeal?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: They have fought this every step of the way and it seems likely that Limbaugh's lawyers will go to the state Supreme Court.
PHILLIPS: So, is it possible that those records will be made public, and that we could actually see where on those records in detail? and how devastating could that be?
TOOBIN: I think it's unlikely that they will be made public, unless there is a criminal trial of Limbaugh, unless several steps take place. The records are turned over to prosecutor. Prosecutors charge him. There's no plea bargain and there is then a public trial of Limbaugh. That's a lot of steps that have yet to take place. Simply turning them over to prosecutors will not result in their being made public.
So even if Limbaugh loses this lawsuit, it doesn't mean that he will -- that the records will be made public immediately or even ever. PHILLIPS: And as John Zarrella said no charges have been filed, there appears to be no investigation under way. So could this be the end of this story?
TOOBIN: Actually, I don't think so. I think there's no -- the investigation is very much still alive, according to my information. and it was very -- it was on hold pending this lawsuit. So I think Rush Limbaugh is by no means out of the woods. In fact, he is deeper into the woods because of this decision. Whether there will be a prosecution, whether the charges will actually be filed, I can't say. But certainly, this decision will put new life into the investigation.
PHILLIPS: All right, so finally now, this decision that has gone forward, what are the state's options?
TOOBIN: Well, the state has won. The state will get the documents unless Rush Limbaugh gets another court to intervene. So the state will get these records that it seized from his doctor and then will determine whether these are evidence -- the documents are evidence of a crime committed by Rush Limbaugh or someone else.
PHILLIPS: But now the state has to make that decision, though, right, Jeffrey?
TOOBIN: Sorry?
PHILLIPS: Now the state has to make a decision, though, of what to do about these records, correct?
TOOBIN: Right. They have to examine them. Their investigators will examine them and determine whether they justify prosecuting Limbaugh or anyone else.
PHILLIPS: All right. Jeffrey Toobin, our legal analyst. Thank you so much. It can be a little bit confusing.
Once again, if you're just tuning in, the court of appeal did back the seizure of Rush Limbaugh's medical records. The state acted correctly when it seized Rush Limbaugh's medical records. That's according to the fourth district court of appeal. Also going on to say the seizure did not affect his right to privacy.
Once again, also want to maintain that Limbaugh has not been charged in an investigation and maintains that he has done nothing illegal. We'll continue to follow, of course, this story throughout the day -- Daryn.
KAGAN: All right. Kyra, thank you very much.
We will take a break and we're back after this with much more news.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: All right. Let's back to news from the campaign trail. Democrats responding after President Bush goes on the offensive this morning. In a speech from Pennsylvania that just wrapped up -- you saw it live here on CNN -- the president sharpened his attack on Senator John Kerry over the war in Iraq and the economy.
Representative Jane Harman, a Democrat from southern California, joins me from Capitol Hill to respond to the president's speech.
Congresswoman, good morning. Thanks for being here with me.
REP. JANE HARMAN (D), CALIFORNIA: Good morning.
KAGAN: Let's get right to some of the points that President Bush was making, trying to differentiate what a vote for him would be compared to a vote for John Kerry. I guess in some ways that's one thing you can agree with on the president -- with the president.
HARMAN: Well, I agree that he was trying to get votes. I disagree that he was effective in differentiating himself from some of the good ideas that John Kerry has put forward. In fact, I would call it his Mulligan speech. This is his attempt at a second shot to tell America what he failed to tell America in his debate with John Kerry, and I think this shot also fell far short.
KAGAN: OK. Let's go over some of the points that President Bush made to the audience in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. First of all, he hit hared on taxes, saying he is a president that has lowered taxes. And he said John Kerry is somebody who has voted a number of times to raise taxes.
HARMAN: Well, he's accusing of Kerry to roll back some prospective tax increases which are leading us to this incredible $8 trillion in debt, the swing from when Bush took office, and huge, huge, massive deficits each year. And so I don't call that a tax increase. I call that a responsible fiscal policy, which this administration has not been for.
KAGAN: The biggest chunk of the speech talking about homeland defense, about the war on terror.
HARMAN: Right.
KAGAN: This president saying that he decided after September 1 that he couldn't take any chances, that "the best ways to safety for America is a path to action." And he says that John Kerry has a theory of September 10, that he's living in a September 10 world. What would you say to that?
HARMAN: Yes, I heard that, the September 10 mindset. That was the mindset of the administration before September 11, not looking forward the way I thought the late Clinton years did, and those of us who served on commissions on terror, which I did. But here is really the point.
There are huge mistakes on this president's watch in the war on terror. Just to list a few this week, we now know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We now know that there was no al Qaeda-Saddam Hussein connection. We now know that our European allies wanted to commit troops before they were mortally offended by the rhetoric and actions of this administration.
None of those things were addressed by the president today. There are two Americas. There's the one in the minds of these White House advisers, and then there's the reality on the ground. And I think Americans understand, as John Edwards said effectively last night, that things are not going well in Iraq, and we need someone who will face that level with the American people, tell them the truth, and then change these failed policies.
KAGAN: And then, finally, the president was trying to mark a difference between where he puts America versus the rest of the world. He was suggesting that John Kerry would put the opinion of an international criminal court above what would be taking place and what would be demands from here in America. What would you say to that?
HARMAN: No one is arguing, John Kerry is not arguing that the actions of our soldiers, consistent with international conventions on war, would go before the international criminal court. No one has ever argued that.
That is just a strawman, as they say. And this president is trying to skewer some of the statements of John Kerry.
It's an election. Many of us who have been through tough elections understand this, but I think the American people are seeing through these excellent 90-minute debates the difference between the Democratic candidates for president and vice president, who want to level with the American people and tell them the truth, and this fantasy administration.
KAGAN: Representative Jane Harman from Capitol Hill.
HARMAN: Thank you.
KAGAN: Thank you for your time, for giving us a different take from what we heard from President Bush. Thank you so much, Congresswoman. Appreciate that.
Well, the senator will be able to speak for himself. He is in Colorado today. He's staying out of the spotlight, getting ready for Friday night's debate. Our national correspondent, Frank Buckley, is with the Kerry campaign, joining us from Englewood, Colorado.
Good morning.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey there, Daryn.
The Kerry campaign thought it was effective to get Senator Kerry off the campaign trail for the first debate, the foreign policy debate last week, and allowed him to clear his head and to focus on the issues that were expected to come up at the debate. So they're doing it again here, leading up to this debate coming up on Friday.
Senator Kerry arriving here in the Denver, Colorado, area yesterday afternoon to an airport rally. This state, Colorado, one that went to President Bush in 2000 by eight points, but it's one that Democrats believe they have a shot at this year. They're spending money here and they're spending time here.
Senator Kerry was here last night to watch the debate. He watched it in his hotel suite with his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, who's celebrating her birthday. After the debate, Senator Kerry called his running mate, Senator John Edwards, for the benefit of the assembled pool of journalists, and engaged in his own post-debate spin during the phone call.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It helped. But I have to tell you, you know, the country saw the clarity, the country sees the choice.
He had no answer about Halliburton. He had no answer about, you know, taking care of the drug companies and the other companies. He has no answer about the unfairness of their taxes. And he was incorrect in the facts that he kept putting out.
So we're going to have a terrific opportunity just to continue to talk about the truth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BUCKLEY: And the Kerry campaign did its best to soften the blow of one of Vice President Dick Cheney's best zingers of the night, when Vice President Cheney suggested that Senator Edwards had a terrible attendance record in the U.S. Senate, saying that as Senate president he'd never met John Edwards.
Well, soon after that, the Kerry campaign released a grainy still photo, a video grab from a C-SPAN coverage of a 2001 prayer breakfast in which you can clearly see Senator Edwards and Vice President Cheney together. They also released excerpts of Vice President's Cheney's remarks at that breakfast in which Vice President Cheney thanked Senator Edwards for his appearance. So that was some of the reaction to the debate last night.
Meanwhile, today, Senator Kerry continues with his debate preparations here. We are told that, once again, Greg Craig, who was one of President Clinton's attorneys during the impeachment process, is going to be playing the role of President Bush -- Daryn.
KAGAN: Frank Buckley in Englewood, Colorado, thank you for that.
To our viewers, stay with CNN for extensive coverage on the second presidential debate. It will be live from St. Louis. CNN's coverage begins at 7:00 Eastern, 4:00 Pacific.
The U.S. military says it has good news coming from Iraq, but it comes at a heavy cost to a lot of civilians, civilians it says are used to -- that are being used as shields. That is coming up next.
Also, the CIA's final report on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, it's out, and the critics might already be saying, "Told you so." And later, before the flu hits America, the fear may be. We'll have the latest on a development that is stopping much of the flu vaccine.
CNN LIVE TODAY is back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: Checking developments in Iraq. A car bomb at a National Guard camp in northwestern Iraq went off today. Twelve guard members were killed in the town of Ana (ph), on the Euphrates River near the border with Syria.
The U.S. military says the crackdown against insurgents in Samarra has been very successful. Officials say militants have been defeated and the city is returning to normal. The U.S. says 127 insurgents and 20 civilians were killed in the crackdown.
A long-awaited report on Iraq's arms programs goes to Congress today. It will conclude what has become obvious: Iraq did not have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Let's bring in national security correspondent David Ensor.
David, good morning.
DAVID ENSOR, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.
As you say, this report, a thousand-plus pages, will land with a loud thump on a lot of desks in Washington later this afternoon. And it is liable to have an impact on the political season as ammunition for both sides.
It was authored by Charles Duelfer, the CIA's top man looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He was a former U.N. arms inspector, someone who spent much of his life on this topic. Kind of a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) on the issue, really knows the details.
The headline, as you say, is that the report finds that there are no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction inside Iraq. And it says that there's no evidence that illicit weapons programs with military implications, in other words, large amounts, were restarted by Saddam Hussein after 1991.
That's ammunition for the opponents of President Bush. There's also some ammunition for his supporters.
The report goes on to say that Saddam Hussein intended to restart his WMD program and that there's plenty of evidence of that. And the -- and the report, we are told, will name companies that defied U.N. sanctions, including American, French, Russian and Polish companies, although in the public version of the report, the American names will be left out because the privacy act doesn't allow them to be put in. However, we understand that the congressmen will have those names, so chances are we'll hear about them. The report also will say, we are told by officials who have seen it, that Saddam, in the interrogation of Saddam, he has said that the reason he wanted to keep WMD program alive or keep the possibility alive so devotedly was because he thought they had helped him twice very importantly. Once, that he believes they stopped the U.S. from marching on Baghdad back in 1991, when you'll recall the first President Bush decided to take back Kuwait, but go no further.
And secondly, he says that, of course, the massive use of Iraqi chemical weapons against Iran in the Iran-Iraq war, in his belief, prevented Iran from winning that war. So the dictator had good reasons for believing that WMD was something that was important to him.
Now, the report is being described as a comprehensive one. And, as I said, it's over a thousand pages.
We understand that Duelfer will avoid the word "final," final report, because there still are some loose ends to wrap up. I mean, for example, there are 900 linguists, we are told, in a facility in Qatar who are still going through Arabic language documents having to do with WMD, though officials say they don't believe anything will be found in those documents that will substantially change the findings that will be announced today -- Daryn.
KAGAN: David Ensor, thank you for the latest on that report. Looking forward to more later.
Coming up next, we're going to look back at the vice presidential debate. Who do you think won last night's debate? We will show you what the polls are saying, coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
